03-28-94 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, MARCH 28, 1994
CONCURRENT CITY COUNCIL AND
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
7.00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
PRESENTATIONS
1. PRESENTATION FROM RICHFIELD HIGH SCHOOL BAND MEMBERS AND
SMALL GROUP FROM AMERICAN LEGION-RICHFIELD POST #435
2. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION HONORING U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
MARTIN OLAV SABO FOR ASSISTANCE ON THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
77TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED CONCURRENTLY BY CITY COUNCIL AND HRA:
1. CONSIDERATION OF CONCEPTUAL ACCEPTANCE OF SHOPS AT LYNDALE
REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL; ILN
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 90
HRA LETTER NO. 24
ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED BY HRA:
1. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING MODIFICATION TO
RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN, CONSISTING OF
MODIFICATION NO. 4 TO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING PLAN FOR INTERSTATE/LYNDALE/NICOLLET REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT; REQUESTING RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL TO CONDUCT A
PUBLIC HEARING RECOMMENDING.APPROVAL OF THE PLANS
HRA LETTER NO. 25
2. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE
REDEVELOPMENT WITH CSM CORPORATION; ILN REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT
0 HRA LETTER.NO. 26
3. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION AND
QUICK TAKE OF PHASE I, THE SHOPS AT LYNDALE; ILN
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
HRA LETTER NO. 27
4. CONSIDERATION OF TIME AND EVENTS SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED CSM
PROJECT; PHASE I
HRA LETTER NO. 28
ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED BY CITY COUNCIL:
1. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION DIRECTING PLANNING COMMISSION TO
REVIEW AND CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT
PLAN MAP WITH RESPECT TO CSM PROPOSAL AND RELOCATION OF
EMERSON AVENUE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 91
2. CONSIDERATION OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND FIRST
READING OF ORDINANCE REZONING LAND FROM HIGH DENSITY
COMMERCIAL TO PLANNED GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR CSM PROPOSAL
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 92.
3. CONSIDERATION OF SCHEDULING SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR
7 P.M. ON MONDAY, APRIL 18, 1994 FOR PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING:
? PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SECOND READING TO
REZONE PHASE I AND PHASE II OF CSM PROPOSAL;
? CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PHASE I
OF CSM PROPOSAL;.
? AMENDMENTS TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP WITH RESPECT TO CSM
PROPOSAL
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 93
4. CONSIDERATION OF TIME AND EVENTS SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED CSM
PROJECT; PHASE I
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 94
ADJOURNMENT
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING CONCURRENT MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
CALL TO ORDER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE (1) SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL/HOUSING
AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING OF MARCH 14, 1994 AND (2)
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 14, 1994
PRESENTATION
1. OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT
LISTED ON THE AGENDA
AGENDA APPROVAL
2. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTE: CONSENT CALENDAR CONTAINS SEVERAL SEPARATE ITEMS WHICH ARE
ACTED UPON BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN ONE MOTION. ONCE THE CONSENT
CALENDAR HAS BEEN APPROVED, THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AND RECOMMENDED
ACTIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN APPROVED. NO FURTHER COUNCIL ACTION IS
NECESSARY. HOWEVER, ANY COUNCIL MEMBER MAY REQUEST THAT AN ITEM
BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND ACTION. ALL ITEMS LISTED ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
3A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE WITH DONATED FUNDS OF
CITY SIGN AND MESSAGE BOARD FOR CITY HALL IN AMOUNT OF
$10,065 C.L. 95
B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR OFF-STREET PARKING
PERMIT TO ACCOMMODATE BUILDING EXPANSION AND PARKING LOT
EXPANSION AT ST. NICHOLAS CHURCH, 7227 PENN AVENUE C.L. 96
C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST
COMPENSATION AND AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF PARTIAL FEE TAKING
AND TEMPORARY EASEMENTS AT 7701 PORTLAND AVENUE; 77TH STREET
PROJECT C.L. 97
D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF GRANT APPLICATION TO MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT AND AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SEND
LETTER OF SUPPORT TO BLOOMINGTON FOR 79TH STREET BIKEWAY
C.L. 98
E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR
INSTALLATION OF NEW 911 EQUIPMENT AND TWO 20-KEY TELEPHONES
LEASED FROM US WEST COMMUNICATIONS IN PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMUNICATIONS CENTER IN AMOUNT OF $5,540.00 C.L. 99
F. CONSIDERATION OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR AERIAL
PHOTOGRAPHS OF RICHFIELD WITH ONE FOOT ELEVATION CONTOURS
FROM HORIZONS IN AMOUNT OF $52,940 C.L. 100
G. CONSIDERATION OF
OF 1994 CONTRACT
PROPERTY IN BOTH
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
H. CONSIDERATION OF
SERVICE CORPORAT
VEHICLES
APPROVAL OF BID MINUTES/TABULATION AND AWARD
FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES ON PRIVATE
DISTRICTS TO CERES TREE COMPANY IN TOTAL
OF $108,764 C.L. 101
APPROVAL OF TAXICAB LICENSE: YELLOW TAXI
ION d/b/a SUBURBAN YELLOW CAB COMPANY; 8
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF INTERIM ORDINANCE FOR
PURPOSE OF PROTECTING PLANNING PROCESS AND HEALTH, SAFETY,
AND WELFARE OF CITY RESIDENTS; AND REGULATING AND
RESTRICTING DEVELOPMENT OF GUNSHOP USES WITHIN CITY
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 102
5. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
REGULATE DRIVEWAYS, PARKING AREAS AND SIDEWALKS IN SINGLE
FAMILY AND LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS; AND
CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING APPENDIX D OF ORDINANCE
CODE OF CITY OF RICHFIELD SETTING PERMIT FEE FOR EXPANSION
OR INSTALLATION OF DRIVEWAYS, PARKING AREAS AND SIDEWALKS
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 103
PROPOSED ORDINANCES
6. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
REZONE THE. FOLLOWING MULTIPLE RESIDENCE PROPERTIES: 1) 6409,
6415, 6421 AND 6429 BLAISDELL AVENUE TO SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE; 2) 6227-29 AND 6237 PLEASANT AVENUE TO HIGH
DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE ; 3) 840 WEST 65TH STREET TO
HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE; AND 4) 920-24-28 RAE
DRIVE TO HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 104
7. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION CALLING FOR ACQUISITION AND
PUBLIC HEARING ON SALE OF 7537 GIRARD AVENUE; AND FIRST
READING OF ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING SALE OF PROPERTY TO-HRA
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 105
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS
8. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR NEW 1994 NON-INTOXICATING MALT
LIQUOR LICENSE FOR KIANG'S RED PEPPER, INC. d/b/a RED PEPPER
CHINESE RESTAURANT, 2902 WEST 66TH STREET
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 106.
9. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR 60 DAY TEMPORARY ON-SALE AND
SUNDAY LIQUOR LICENSE FOR CHAMPPS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
d/b/a CHAMPPS SPORTS CAFE, 790 WEST 66TH STREET
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 107
10. CONSIDERATION OF SETTING DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR
CONSIDERATION OF NEW ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR CHAMPPS
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION d/b/a CHAMPPS SPORTS-CAFE, 790 WEST
66TH STREET
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 108
11. CONSIDERATION OF EXPENDITURE OF $93;030 FOR INSTALLATION OF
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND ALONG 77TH STREET BETWEEN CHICAGO
AVENUE AND BLOOMINGTON AVENUE AS PART OF 77TH STREET
RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 109
AIRPORT BUSINESS
12. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT
0 77TH STREET PROJECT BUSINESS
13. 77TH STREET PROJECT STATUS REPORT
CORRESPONDENCE
14. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
COUNCIL CHOICE
15. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS
16. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
ADJOURNMENT
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available
upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance
to.the Administrative Services Director at 861-9702.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 28
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Approval of time and events schedule for the proposed CSM
project, Phase I.
Background:
Attached are two schedules. One schedule is organized on a
calendar basis, the other schedule is organized according to
major activities. The events in both schedules are the same.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the schedules with staff being authorized to make
adjustments as necessary.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. It is necessary to follow the schedules to comply with the
Contract for Private Development.
2. If the schedule is maintained, it appears possible that the
needs of CSM for a July Phase I start followed by a November
opening of Phase I will be met.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Delay discussion of the schedule.
2. Suggest modifications to the schedule.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The schedules have a significant impact on the processing of the
CSM proposal and Phase I construction start and opening.
Res7tv?e lly submitted,
JamProsser
ExeDirector
JDP:ds
0
Preliminary
Time and Events
CSM Proposal
1 ILN
By Date
CSM submit concept proposal statement PC-2 plan and
Final Development Plan Phase 1 and Phase 2. 3/16
Development Agreement to HRA for review. 3/21
Redevelopment Plan Modification to HRA for review 3/21
Condemnation Shops at Lyndale Phase 1 quick take HRA for review. 3/21
Fiscal disparities contribution shift and report/analysis of impacts, process
etc. to HRA for review. 3/21
Review request by HRA that Planning Commission find sale of property in
conformance with Comprehensive Plan. (Incorporated into HRA resolution
approving Modification No. 4.) 3/21
Notify School District and County of City Council public hearing on
Redevelopment Plan Modification scheduled for 4/25 (30 days
between notice and hearing required). 3/22
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/12 Planning Commission hearing on
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3/22
Schedule with Planning Commission a special meeting for 4/12 regarding
Rezoning/Conditional Use Permit/Final Development Plan. 3/22
ARC meeting with presentation of concept proposal statement PC-2
Plan and Final Development Plan by CSM and review by technical staff. 3/23
By Date
Page 2
Development Agreement to HRA for action. 3/28
Redevelopment Plan Modification to HRA for approval subject
to Planning Commission findings 3/28
Condemnation Shops at Lyndale Phase 1 quick take for HRA for action. 3/28
Fiscal disparities contribution shift and report/analysis of
impacts, process etc. to HRA for action. (Incorporated into HRA
resolution approving Modification No. 4.) 3/28
Request by HRA that Planning Commission find sale of property in
conformance with Comprehensive Plan 3/28
City Council request Planning Commission to schedule public hearing on
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3/28
is Fiscal disparities contribution shift report/analysis of impacts, process
for City Council action. 3/28
City Council initiate request for rezoning for Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas
and give first reading to ordinance. 3/28
City Council set special meeting for 4/18 for hearing on rezone for Phase 1 and
Phase 2 areas and second reading of ordinance. 3/28
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/25 City Council hearing on Redevelopment
Plan Modification. 3/29
Notice to Ferber regarding HRA hearing on sale of property; portion
of Cloverleaf site for Church and Phase 1. 3/29
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council public hearing on
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3/29
By Date
2
Page 3
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on Conditional
Use Permit/Final Development Plan for Phase 1 and Phase 2. 3/29
Notice to Ferber regarding City Council hearing on rezoning for
Phase 1 and Phase 2 and second reading. 3/29
Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on rezoning. 3/29
Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on Conditional
Use Permit/Final Development Plan 3/29
Notice of Planning Commission hearing on Comprehensive Plan
Amendment published. 3/30
Commence condemnation and quick take, Phase 1.
4/1
Notice regarding City Council hearing on Redevelopment Plan
modification published. 4/6
Publication of hearing notice on HRA sale of property; portion of
Cloverleaf site and Phase 1. 4/6
Notice of City Council hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment
published. 4/6
Notice published City Council hearing on Conditional Use Permit/
Final Development Plan. 4/6
Notice published City Council hearing on Rezoning.
4/6
Mail notice regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on Conditional
Use Permit/Final Development Plan. 4/6
By Date
3
Page 4
Planning Commission findings the Redevelopment Plan Modification
conforms with Comprehensive Plan; special meeting. 4/12
Planning Commission finding that sale of property by HRA is
in conformance with Comprehensive Plan; special meeting. 4/12
Public hearing by Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan
Amendment; special meeting. 4/12
Planning Commission action on rezoning Phase 1 and Phase 2;
special meeting. 4/12
Planning Commission action on Conditional Use Permit/Final
Development Plan, Phase 1. 4/12
HRA hearing on sale of property; portion of Cloverleaf site and Phase 1. 4/18
Public hearing by City Council Comprehensive Plan Amendment;
special meeting. 4/18
City Council public hearing and second reading regarding rezoning;
special meeting. 4/18
City Council public hearing Conditional Use Permit/Final Development
Plan special meeting. 4/18
City Council public hearing Redevelopment Plan Modification. 4/25
Rezoning published. 4/27
Rezoning effective. 5/27
is Title and possession through condemnation quick take, Phase 1. 7/1
By Date
4
w
0
•
Preliminary
Time and Events
CSM Proposal
ILN
By Activities
Development Agreement
Defines roles/responsibilities of HRA/CSM. A significant item is the provision for tax increment
"pay as you go" assistance.
To HRA for review
To HRA for action; special meeting
3/21
3/28
Condemnation
Title to property obtained by court order if negotiations are not successful. Quick take provides
title in about 90 days.
Shops at Lyndale Phase 1 Quick take to HRA for review 3/21
To HRA for action; special meeting 3/28
Shops at Lyndale Phase 2 Condemnation without quick take No Date
to HRA for action
Commence condemnation and quick take, Phase 1 4/1
Title and possession through quick take, Phase 1 7/1
Title and possession without quick take, Phase 2 No Date
By Activities
1
Page 2
0
Fiscal disparities contribution shift
Special legislation makes it possible for the City to elect to pay the fiscal
disparities contribution from outside the district even though the initial
choice was to pay from within the district.
Report/analysis of impacts, process etc. to HRA for review 3/21
To HRA for action; special meeting 3/28
Report same to City Council for action 3/28
Redevelopment Plan Modification
The text needs to reflect CSM proposal. Currently it reflects the Larson proposal from 1989.
Property to be acquired is properly identified however.
0
To HRA for review
3/21
To HRA for approval subject to Planning Commission findings;
special meeting 3/28
Notify School District and County of City Council public hearing
scheduled for 4/25 (30 days between notice and hearing required). 3/22
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/25 City Council hearing 3/29
Notice regarding City Council hearing published
4/6
Planning Commission findings the modification conforms with
Comprehensive Plan; special meeting 4/12
By Activities
2
Page 3
City Council public hearing 4/25
Sale in Conformance with Comprehensive Plan
The HRA must sell property only after a public hearing on the sale. Prior to the hearing
the Planning Commission is asked to find that the sale/proposed use is in conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan. The existing Emerson Church site is designated by the Comprehensive Plan
"Institutional" and must be amended to "Freeway Strip".
HRA review request that Planning Commission find sale in
conformance with Comprehensive Plan. (Incorporated into HRA
resolution approving Modification No. 4.) 3/21
To HRA for approval; special meeting 3/28
Planning Commission finding that sale is in conformance;
special meeting 4/12
0 HRA Public hearing on Sale of Property
Public hearing would address sale of a portion of Cloverleaf site
for Church and Phase 1.
Notice to Ferber regarding HRA hearing 3/29
Publication of hearing notice 4/6
Hearing 4/18
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Amend plan to change existing church site designation from "Institutional" to "Freeway Strip".
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/12 Planning Commission hearing 3/22
By Activities
3
Page 4
City Council request Planning Commission to schedule public hearing 3/28
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council public hearing 3/29
Notice of Planning Commission hearing published 3/30
Public hearing by Planning Commission; special meeting 4/12
Notice of City Council hearing published 4/6
Public hearing by City Council; special meeting 4/18
Rezoning/Conditional Use Permit (CUP)/Final Development Plan (FDP
Site is currently zoned C3. FAR not sufficient thus rezone to PC-2.
CUP is also required as is approval of FDP.
CSM submit concept proposal statement PC-2 plan and FDP
Phase 1 and Phase 2. 3/16
Schedule with Planning Commission a special meeting for 4/12 3/22
ARC meeting with presentation of above by CSM and review
by technical staff 3/23
City Council initiate request for rezoning for Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas
and give first reading to ordinance 3/28
•
By Activities
4
Page 5
City Council set special meeting for 4/18 for hearing on rezone for Phase 1
and Phase 2 areas and second reading of ordinance. 3/28
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on CUP/FDP for
Phase 1 and Phase 2 3/29
Notice to Ferber regarding City Council hearing on rezoning for
Phase 1 and Phase 2 and second reading 3/29
Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on rezoning 3/29
Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on CUP/FDP 3/29
Notice published City Council hearing on CUP/FDP 4/6
Notice published City Council hearing on rezoning 4/6
r
Mail notice regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on CUP/FDP 4/6
Planning Commission action on rezoning Phase 1 and Phase 2;
special meeting 4/12
Planning Commission action on CUP/FDP Phase 1; special meeting 4/12
City Council public hearing and second reading regarding of rezoning;
special meeting 4/18
City Council public hearing CUP/FDP; special meeting 4/18
Rezoning published 4/27
Rezoning effective 5/27
By Activities
5
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 27
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Adoption of a resolution authorizing condemnation and quick take
of Phase I, the Shops at Lyndale, ILN Redevelopment Project.
Background:
The CSM Corporation has proposed the redevelopment of the portion
of the ILN south of 77th Street between Emerson and Lyndale
Avenues. The proposal presented to the HRA on March 14, 1994
envisioned approximately 231,000 square feet of retail space and
a restaurant all with supporting parking. Phase I of
approximately 112,000 square feet would be located between
Emerson and Colfax Avenues. CSM indicated that a timely opening
of Phase I prior to the 1994 holiday shopping season is critical
to securing tenants.
To assure a November opening, initiation of construction during
July is necessary. CSM is requesting the HRA to authorize
condemnation and quick take. Quick take would provide title and
possession to the property within 90 days or approximately July
1, 1994. CSM reports that they are hopeful of reaching a
negotiated settlement with several of the property owners. Some
of the property owners while agreeing to a negotiated purchase,
may want a "friendly" condemnation for tax purposes.
The properties to be included are as follows:
? Emerson Avenue Congregational Church
? Southtown Village Apartments
? Cutler Animal Hospital
? Troy & Bill's Ultimate Detailers
? Tandem Press
? Vacant parcel owned by Robert Adelmann
While the HRA would initiate the condemnation action, CSM would
provide the required court deposits and fund the related expenses
so that HRA monies would not be utilized. To this end, they have
deposited with the HRA $10,000 against which the initial legal,
Publicorp and administrative costs would be charged.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution which authorizes the initiation of
quick take condemnation for the Phase I site area of Shops at
Lyndale.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. This action is consistent with state law and the
redevelopment plan.
2. CSM has tenants who must be assured of space availability
during November or they will likely become tenants in
commercial space in an adjoining community.
3. Negotiations between CSM and some of the property owners will
negate the need for condemnation on some parcels. It will
however, be necessary on others.
4. CSM will provide the court deposit and fund related costs as
required by the contract for private development.
5. This proposed action was discussed by the HRA at their March
21, 1994 meeting.
6. This action is reversible if final project approval is not
granted.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Delay action.
2. Refuse the request.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
To benefit from this development "window of opportunity", the HRA
should take action to assure the timely availability of the Phase
I site.
0
JDP:ds
Respe ly submitted,
James Prosser
Executive Director
E
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
10 AUTHORIZING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS
TO ACQUIRE CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the
City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "HRA") is a housing and
redevelopment authority duly constituted and organized under law, with
all of the powers enumerated in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001
to 469.047 (the "Act"); and
WHEREAS, the HRA is authorized to develop and carry out
redevelopment plans and redevelopment projects, as those terms are
respectively defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.002,
subdivisions 16 and 14; and
WHEREAS, the HRA adopted a redevelopment plan (the "Redevelopment
Plan") and a tax increment financing plan (the "TIF Plan") for the
area in the City of Richfield generally known as the
Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet area (the "Project Area") on October 21,
1985; and
WHEREAS, changes in the public and private improvements proposed
to be constructed within the Project Area occurred and necessitated
adopting subsequent modifications to the Plans, identified as
Modification Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, which were approved by the HRA and
adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield on the respective
dates in 1985, 1989, 1993, and 1994; and
WHEREAS, the Plans, as modified, contemplate the acquisition of
certain real property (the "Property") which is located in the Project
Area and which is more particularly described below in this
resolution; and
WHEREAS, no owners of adjacent parcels to the Property described
in this resolution, displaced persons or businesses from among those
properties, or other persons or businesses within the Project Area
have demonstrated the technical and financial capability to carry out
the proposed redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, the HRA has, by action of this date, approved the
execution of a contract for private redevelopment (the "Contract") of
land lying within the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the Contract requires the HRA to acquire title to and
possession of the Property by the earliest date permitted in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, 117.042.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. It is necessary to acquire the Property as described below in
the resolution in order for the HRA to carry out the purposes of the
Plans, as modified, and the Act, to eliminate and prevent the
development or spread of conditions of blight found to exist by the
City and the HRA and to assure full utilization of property which is
vacant, unused, underused, and inappropriately used.
2. Acquisition of the Property by eminent domain, in the manner
• provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 117, is deemed to be necessary
and for a public purpose and is herby authorized.
3. The HRA deems it necessary for the reason set forth in the
Plans, as modified, and in order to fulfill the HRA's obligations
under the Contract, to proceed without delay under Minnesota Statutes,
Section 117.042, to acquire title to and possession of the Property
prior to the filing of a final report of commissioners.
4. The HRA's attorney and staff are authorized and directed to
commence eminent domain proceedings to acquire fee simple absolute
title to the Property, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 117.042
and to pay to the owner(s) or into court, a sum of money to secure
compensation to the owners of the Property, which amount shall be
equal to petitioner's approved appraisal of value as determined by
staff.
5. The property to be acquired is described as follows:
That part of the West 320 feet of the South Half of Southeast Quarter
of the Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Township 28, Range 24,
Hennepin County, Minnesota lying south of the North 30 feet thereof
and also lying northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50
feet northerly of the following described line:
Beginning at a point on the west line of the Southeast Quarter of
the Southeast Quarter of said Section 33 distant 75 feet north of
the southwest corner thereof; thence run easterly to a point on
the east line of said Southeast Quarter of Southeast Quarter
distant 145 feet north of the southeast corner thereof and said
described line there terminating.
Together with the the East Half of the Southeast quarter of the
Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 33 except
the following described parts thereof:
The North 30 feet of said East Half;
The West 30 feet of the South 210 feet of the North 240 feet of
said East Half;
That part thereof lying southerly of the northerly right-of-way
line of Interstate Highway No. 494.
Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the
City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March 1994.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson
a ATTEST:
Vern Luettinger, Secretary
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 26
Agenda March 28, 1994
16 Issue Statement:
Approval of Contract For Private Development between HRA and CSM
Corporation; ILN Redevelopment Project.
Background:
At the March 21,
reviewed a draft
now in its final
in substantially
March 21, 1994.
follows:
1994 HRA meeting, legal counsel John Dean
of the development contract. That contract is
form subject to HRA review and approval. It is
the same form as that which was presented on
A summary of the major points of the contract
Articles I and II beginning on page 2 contain definitions and
rrepresentations for the developer and HRA. -Article III is
probably the most significant as it address acquisition and
financial assistance and begins on page 6. Sec. 3.2.(a)-(c)
indicate the HRA will initiate condemnation on Phase I property
immediately upon execution of the contract. The developer is
responsible for the required court deposit and all related
expenses incurred by the HRA. The contract then lists several
conditions (d) which must be met by the developer including the
execution of an agreement by the HRA and developer which would
provide for the relocation of Emerson Avenue Congregational
Church. The site would be available at a cost not to exceed the
HRA's per square foot cost.
Sec. 3.2.(g) provides for the reimbursement of redeveloper's
expenses. The basis for reimbursement would be a note for each
Phase. Note I for Phase I is Exhibit D in the amount of
$1,869,036. The Note would not be delivered to the developer
until closing on the real estate for Phase I.
The Note clearly indicates they do not become debt of the HRA nor
the City and are payable only from the tax increment (if taxes
are not paid there is no payment to the developer). In addition
to the principal amount stated above, interest at 8.5% would be
paid.
As discussed at the March 21, 1994 HRA meeting, the developer
indicated they required the full increment including that which
would be utilized to pay the contribution to the fiscal
disparities pool. Thus, Sec. 3.2(h) provides a payment by the
HRA in the amount of $500,000 to help cover the loss of increment
to the fiscal disparities pool. (Sec. 3.3(m) provides an
additional $100,000 at the time of closing on the Phase II site.)
Phase II property acquisition is discussed in Section 3.3. Upon
the developer providing specified information (a)-(g) the HRA
would initiate condemnation. Section 3.3(i) contains a list of
circumstances (i) under which acquisition by the HRA of the
property may be discontinued. However the developer continues to
be responsible for HRA costs related to the Phase II
condemnation. This section further provides that the HRA may
utilize Note I as security for the developer's obligations in
this regard. Paragraph (k) provides for Note II in the principal
amount of $1,125,759. The conditions of this note for Phase II
are the same as those identified for Note I.
Article IV relates to construction. Much of this Section is
standard language which has been used in other contracts.
However, it is noteworthy that the developer is allowed 12 months
to construct Phase I and 18 months to construct Phase II. The
minimum value for each phase is $7 million and $7.5 million,
respectively. Upon request by the developer, a certificate of
completion is to be provided by the HRA.
•
Article VIII addresses conditions placed
lender financing. Article IX deals with
assignment and transfer of the property.
restrictions within the Gary Holmes fami:
controlled by them. Article X discusses
, . <contains-.miscellaneous provisions.
on the developer's
restrictions on
Section 9.6 exempts
Ly and entities
defaults and Article XI
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution which approves the contract for
private development between the HRA and CSM Corporation
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The proposed development cannot proceed without a contract.
2. The contract is consistent with previous discussions related
to the CSM proposal and consistent in general with previous
redevelopment contracts.
3. CSM is an experienced developer. See the attached
information.
4. The contract was presented for discussion at the March 21,
1994 HRA meeting.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Delay approval.
2. Propose modification.
.Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action on March 28, 1994 will make it possible for the
development to proceed.
Respe ly submitted,
James Tve rosser
ExecuDire ctor
JDP:cak
I--]
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
APPROVING CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
WITH CSM CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for
the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "Authority") has properly
created and is administering its Redevelopment District (the
"District") pursuant to Minn. Stat. Chapter 469 in an effort to
encourage the development and redevelopment of certain designated
areas within the City of Richfield; and
WHEREAS, among the development, activities proposed to be
assisted by the Authority in the District involve the development
of retail-commercial facilities; and
WHEREAS, there has been presented before the Authority a
form of Contract for Private redevelopment ("Contract") among the
Authority and CSM Corporation, setting forth the parties
respective responsibility in developing retail-commercial
facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has
that the execution of the same
its obligations thereunder are
Authority and its residents.
s reviewed the Contract and finds
and the Authority's performance of
in the best interest of the
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. That the Contract, as presented to the Authority, is
herby in all respects approved, subject to insubstantial
modifications which may be subsequently approved by the Board
Chair and the Authority's legal counsel.
2. That the proper Authority officers are herby authorized
to execute the Contract on behalf of the Authority"and to carry
out, on behalf of the Authority, the Authority's obligations
thereunder.
Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and
for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March 1994.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Vern Luettinger, Secretary
03/11/94 15:58 FAX 612 646 2404 CS11 CORPORATION 1 002/006
CSM Corporation
2561 Territorial Road • SL Paul, MN 55774.1500.612646-1777 • FAX 6121646.2404
March 11, 1994
Mr. James D. Prosser
City Manager
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423-2599
Re: Shops at Lyndale
NWC I-494 and Lyndale Avenue
Dear Mr. Prosser:
Further to our meeting on Tuesday, March 8, enclosed please find a Real Estate Resume for
CSM Corporation, and its president and sole 'shareholder, Gary. Holmes.
As indicated on the attached summary of acquisitions and development, CSM has been extremely
active over the last several years in the development and acquisition of industrial, multi family
residential and retail projects.
The total cost of new construction of retail and industrial properties since 1991 has exceed $18
million, and has been funded internally through our own cash reserves and lines of credit.
Acquisitions of industrial and retail -property over the last several years has totalled in excess of
$10 million, which has also been funded internally. The total value. of our apartment
developments over the last several years has exceeded $95 million.
CSM was awarded the 1993 NAIOP Industrial Building of the Year award for Gateway Business
Center, and 1993 Minnesota Shopping Center Association Starr awards for Sportmart Plaza
Shopping Center and Bonaventure Shopping Center.
We are happy to provide a letter of reference from our Bank if necessary. Please do not hesitate
to-contact me should you require such a letter.- Our current line of credit is sufficient to fund
the initial acquisition of the Phase I land utilizing the "quick take" process, and thus we are not
anticipating the need for acquisition or construction financing for Phase 1.
0
• 03/11/94 .15:59.-FAX 612 646 2404 CSM CORPORATION 2063/006
you have any questions regarding. the enclosed material,
Should'
please do nbt hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely 'ours,
Murray Ko berg
cc: By on J. Wa ace
Bi?uce .Palmborg
Dave Carland
0
03/11/94 15:59 FAX 612 646 2404 CSM CORPORATION
•
Cam CORPORATION
CoMaRCIAL ACQUISITIONS AND DBVSI.OPMEKTS
1991 TBROUGN 1994
Protect ize Location
Tvne
All American mini storage 290 Units Denver, CO Mini Storage
Best Buy Plaza Shopping 61,350 Sr St. Cloud, MN Retail
Center
Best Buy Plaza Shopping 11,600 BFI Grand Forks, ND Retaii
Center Phase II
Blockbuster Video 51500 sF St. Paul, MN Retail
(Lexington Avenue)
Blockbuster Video 6,400 Sly' Minneapolis., MN Retail
(Lake Street)
Bonaventure Shoppinq Center 83,798 SF Minnetonka, MN Retail
.Boon. Avenue Business Center 160,000 SF Brooklyn Park, MN Office/
Warehouse
Bryant Street Warehouse 339,040 SF Denver, CO Warehouse/
Distribution
Century Hills Shopping Center 54,165 SF White Bear Lake, Retail
MN
Country Inn 5,664 SF Woodbury, MN Hotel
160 units
Gateway Business Center 48,000 SF Roseville, MN Showroom
Park Glen Business Center 83,000 SF St. Louis Park, Office/
MN Warehouse
Patton Building 70,700 SF Roseville, MN Office/
Warehouse
Skyline Business Center 140,000 SF Minneapolis,. MN office/
Warehouse
Sportm4rt plaza Shopping Ctr. 66,000 SF Minnetonka, MN Retail
Westgate Business Center 77,000 Sr St. Paul, MN Office/
Phase I Warehouse
Westgate Business cantor 66,000 5V at. Paul, MN Office/
Phase II Showroom
Westgate Business Center 103,000 SF St. Paul, MN Office/
Phase :II Warehouse
comproj
2004/006
09/11;94 16:00 FAx 612 646 2404 CSM tORPORAT10 ? 005/006
CSH CORPORATION
ELOPMMNTS
RRSIDLNTIAL HOUSING DEV
1991 Tmtou x 1994
* of
Project nits ?4r
Bass Lake Hills Townhomes 284 Plymouth, MN
Creekside Apartments 172 Portland, OR
Fountains Apartments 166 Dos Moines, IA*
Meadow* Townhomes 166 Duluth, MN*
Mequon Trail Townhouse 246 Mequon, WI
Park Place Apartments 72 Fargo, ND*
Rivergroene Apartments 208 Portland, OR
Rivergreens Phan! II 126 Portland, OR
Sunset Place Apartments 172 Beaverton, OR*
under construction
resproj
Oa/11 /94 16:00 FAX*612 646.2404 CSM CORPORATION 006/006
REAL ESTATE RESUME
For
CSM CORPORATION
GARY S. HOLMES
CSM Corporation, formerly Colonial Services do Management, Inc., was incorporated on
December 3, 1976 under the laws of the State of Minnesota. It is engaged in the acquisition,
development, leasing, financing, property management, and sale of real estate in Colorado,
Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North and South Dakota, Wsconsin, Wyoming,
and Oregon. CSM Corporation is a licensed real estate broker in the State of Minnesota.
The CSM group of companies works with both national tenants and local retailers. CSM.has
developed several retail centers for Best Buy Stores, the nations' second largest publicly held
consumer electronics and major appliance specialty retailer, and has just completed its
seventh Best Buy in Saint Cloud, Minnesota. Other national retailers with whom CSM has
completed transactions include Chi Chi's, Perkins Restaurant, JoAnn Fabrics, Filene's
Basement, Sportmart, Coldwell Banker, Blockbuster Video, Border's Books, and 17717horpe
Finance.
In 1990, Mr. Holmes acquired 25% interest in Century Bank, a full-service banking facility
located in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, and also serves as a director for the bank.
Mr. Holmes is a 35 % shareholder and a member of the Board of Directors of Norcr4 t
Companies, Inc., Saint Paul, Minnesota, a manufacturer of kitchen cabinets which has sales
in excess .of $44 mullion. Mr. Holmes is also active as a member of the Board of Directors
of the Minneapolis Heart institute and a member of the Special Advisory Board on Real
Estate Matters of Abbott Northwestern Hospital in Minneapolis, Minnesota. He is a former
shareholder and member of the Board of Directors of the Riverside Community Bank in
Minneapolis, Minnesota.
9
0
CONTRACT FOR
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
3/24/94
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1994,
by and between THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA, a Minnesota public body corporate and
politic (HRA), CSM CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation (Redeveloper).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield and HRA have established the
Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") under the
authority of Minnesota Statutes, 'Chapter 469 (the "Act"), and have established
within the Project Area a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District ("TIF
District") and adopted a Financing Plan ("TIF Plan") for the TIF District to facilitate
the financing of public development and redevelopment costs in the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the HRA deems it to be in the public interest to facilitate and
encourage redevelopment of the Project Area by a combination of public and private
activity within the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area and in
accordance with the TIF Plan adopted by the City, on November 12, 1985, and HRA
on October 21, 1985, and subsequently amended, following extensive study and
preliminary work conducted by the City and HRA and others engaged by them; and
• WHEREAS, the Redeveloper has proposed a development ("Development")
within such Project Area which the HRA believes will promote and carry out the
objectives for which redevelopment is undertaken, will be in the vital best interests
of the City, will promote the health, safety, morals, and welfare of its residents and
will be in accord with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable state and
local laws and requirements under which activities within the Project Area have been
undertaken and are being assisted; and
0
WHEREAS, the Redeveloper is willing to purchase property from third parties
and from the HRA within the Project Area ("Redevelopment Property") and to
develop the Redevelopment Property for and in accordance with this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, consistent with the TIF Plan, the HRA is willing to provide
financial assistance in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual obligations of
the parties contained herein, each of them does hereby represent, covenant and
agree with the others as follows:
JBD67324
RC125-68 1
ARTICLE I
• DEFINITIONS, EXHIBITS
RULES OF INTERPRETATION
Section 1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless a different meaning
clearly appears from the context:
"Act" means the Economic Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469,
as amended.
"Agreement" means this Agreement, as the same may be from time-to-time
modified, amended, or supplemented.
. "Assessment Agreement" means the Assessment Agreement and the form of the
Agreement contained in Exhibit D between the Authority and the Redeveloper
establishing a Minimum Market Value for the Redevelopment Property and complete
Minimum Improvements.
"Authority" means the Housing and. Redevelopment Authority in and for the
City of Richfield, or any successors or assigns.
"Certificate of Completion" means the certification, in the form of the
certificate contained in Exhibit C attached to and made a part of this Agreement,
provided to the Redeveloper, pursuant to Section 4.5 of this Agreement.
• "City" means the City of Richfield.
"Completion of Construction" means with respect to any phase the completion
of construction of the Minimum Improvements for that phase except for tenant finish
work.
"Construction Contract" means a contract or contracts which provides for
completion of a phase on the Minimum Improvements.
"County" means the County of Hennepin.
"Event of Default" means an action by the Redeveloper listed in Article X of
this Agreement.
"Equity" means contributions or funds by Redeveloper sufficient to satisfy the
providers of Financial Commitments and to satisfy the other obligations for which
Equity is required hereunder.
"Financial Commitment" means a written document which sets forth the
conditions which, if satisfied by the Redeveloper, entitles it to a loan in a specified
amount at specific loan terms.
• "Minimum Improvements-Phase I" means the improvements to be constructed
by the Redeveloper on the Phase I Property.
JW67324
RC125-68 2
"Minimum Improvements-Phase II" means the improvements to be constructed
. by the Redeveloper on the Phase II Property.
"Minnesota Environmental Policy Act" means the statutes located at Minnesota
Statutes, § 116D.01 et seg., as amended.
"Minnesota Environmental Rights Act" means the statutes located at Minnesota
Statutes, § 116B.01 et seg., as amended.
"National Environmental Policy Act" means the federal law located at 42 U. S. C.
Section 4311 et seg., as amended.
"Phase I Property" means that portion of the Redevelopment Property which
is described as such in the attached Exhibit A.
"Phase II Property" means that portion of the Redevelopment Property which
is described as such in the attached Exhibit A.
"Redeveloper" means CSM Corporation, a Minnesota corporation.
"Redevelopment Property" means the real property described as such of
Exhibit A of this Agreement.
"State" means the State of Minnesota.
"Tax Increment" means that portion of the real property taxes which is paid
• with respect to the Redevelopment Property which is remitted to the Authority as
Tax Increment pursuant to the Tax Increment Act, after reduction (if any) of fiscal
disparities' contributions which are mandated by state law to be made with respect
to any parcel.
"Tax Increment Act" means Minnesota Statutes, § 469.174 through 469.179,
of the Economic Development Act.
"Tax Official" means any City or county assessor; County auditor; City,
County or State board of equalization, the commissioner of revenue of the State, or
any State or federal district court, the tax court of the State, or the State Supreme
Court.
"Unavoidable Delays" means delays which are the direct result of strikes,
other labor troubles, fire or other casualty to the Minimum Improvements, litigation
commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other similar judicial action,
directly results in delays, or acts of any federal, state or local governmental unit
other than those provided for under this Agreement or any other cause beyond the
control of Redeveloper which directly results in delays, provided, however, that
adverse market conditions affecting the marketability or profitability of the Minimum
Improvements, or the inability to secure financing of the Minimum Improvements shall
not constitute Unavoidable Delays.
1.2 . Exhibits. The following exhibits are attached to and made a part of this
Agreement.
• A. Redevelopment Property Description;
B . Certificate of Completion;
JBD67324
RC125-68 3
C. A [Blank];
D. Phase I Limited Revenue Note ("Note V);
E. Phase II Limited Revenue Note ("Note III').
1.3. Rules of Interpretation. (01) This Agreement shall be interpreted in
accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota;
(02) The words "herein" and "hereof" and words of similar importance,
without reference to any particular section or subdivision refer to this Agreement
as a whole rather than any particular section or subdivision hereof;
(03) Any titles of the several parts, articles and sections of this Agreement
are inserted for convenience and reference only and shall be disregarded in
construing or interpreting any of its provisions.
•
•
JBD67324
RC125-66 4
1 ARTICLE II
REPRESENTATIONS
Section 2.1. Representations by the Redeveloper. (01) The Redeveloper has
the power to enter into this Agreement and has duly authorized the execution,
delivery, and performance of this Agreement by proper action.
(02) If the conditions precedent to construction occur, the Redeveloper
reasonably believes that it has the capability to obtain necessary Equity and a
Financial Commitment necessary for construction of the Minimum Improvements.
(03) If the conditions precedent to construction occur, the Redeveloper will
construct the Minimum Improvements described in the Concept Plans in accordance
with the terms of this Agreement, the Redevelopment Plan and all local, state and
federal laws and regulations.
(04) The Redeveloper will exercise all reasonable efforts to obtain, in a
timely manner, all required permits, licenses, and approvals and will meet in a timely
manner, all lawful requirements of all local, state, and federal laws and regulations
which must be obtained or met before the improvements may be constructed.
(05) Redeveloper will comply in all material respects, with all applicable
local, state and federal environment laws and regulations, will have obtained any and
all necessary environmental reviews, licenses or clearances under, and win be in
material compliance with the applicable requirements of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act, and the Critical Area Act
of 1973 and any other applicable environmental law or regulation. Redeveloper has
not received notice or communication from any local, state or federal official
indicating that the activities of Redeveloper may be or will be in violation of any
environmental law or regulation. Redeveloper is not aware of any facts the existence
of which would cause the Redeveloper to be in violation of any local, state or federal
environmental law, regulation or review procedure or which would give any person
a valid claim under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act;
2.2. Representations by HRA. The HRA makes the following representations
as the basis for the undertakings herein contained.
(01) The HRA is authorized by law to enter into this Agreement and to carry
out their obligations hereunder.
(02) The HRA shall cooperate with Redeveloper in its efforts to obtain all
federal, state, and regional agency land use, environmental or other regulatory
approvals necessary to implement the Project.
(03) The Project Area and TIF District have been properly and legally
established and are currently fully operative. The TIF District was certified on
December 5, 1985; and the first tax increment from the TIF District was remitted to
the HRA in 1987.
JBD67324
RC125-68 5
ARTICLE III
• SITE ASSEMBLY
Section 3.1. Statement of Intent. It is the intention of the parties that the
tracts of land which comprise the Redevelopment Property are to be acquired
through a combination of direct acquisitions by the Redeveloper and acquisitions by
the HRA followed by conveyances to the Redeveloper. It is further the intention of
the parties that, whenever possible, direct acquisition by the Redeveloper is
preferred.
Section 3.2. Phase I Property. (a) Promptly upon the execution of this
Agreement by the parties, the HRA shall commence eminent domain action for the
purpose of acquiring fee simple absolute title to the Phase I Property, the HRA shall
further seek to acquire title to and possession of the Phase I Property by the earliest
date permitted in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, § 117.042.
(b) During the pendency of such actions, the Redeveloper shall be required
to promptly pay all expenses incurred by the HRA in connection with the prosecution
thereof, such expenses include legal, survey, title, appraisal, relocation, process
service, court costs and similar expenses. The HRA shall, not more often than the
monthly during the pendency of the action, furnish the Redeveloper with an itemized
statement of all such expenditures. Redeveloper shall have two weeks from the
receipt of such statement to pay the same.
• (c) Not later than five days prior to any date on which the HRA is required
to deposit any amount into court in order to obtain title and possession to portions
of the Phase I Property or to make relocation benefit payments to persons entitled
to such payments, Redeveloper shall deliver to the HRA funds payable to the HRA
in the amount of any such deposit or payment. The HRA shall then have the right
to use such funds to make such deposit or such payments.
(d) The obligation of the HRA to actually obtain title to and possession of
any of the parcels which make up the Phase I Property shalf* :::: ?e ' i
:.....:::..:.........::...::..:.:::.....
* be specifically subject to the following:
1. Redeveloper is not in default of any provisions of this Agreement
and all amounts due and payable under paragraphs (b) and (c)
above have been paid.
2. Redeveloper has reviewed the condition of title as such is to be
acquired by the HRA and notified the HRA that such condition of
title is satisfactory.
3. The Redeveloper has provided the HRA with an undertaking, and
with security acceptable to the HRA which will assure payment by
the Redeveloper of any condemnation awarded for the Phase I
Property in excess of the previously deposited sums, and the
payment of any relocation benefits which are not yet due or paid.
Such undertaking and security is to remain in affect according
to its terms, and in any event, at least until the Phase I Property
is conveyed to the Redeveloper.
JM67324
RC125-68 6
4. The Redeveloper has informed the HRA that, based upon
10 Redeveloper's own investigation it is satisfied in all respects with
the nature and condition of the Phase I Property, and accepts
the same AS IS and WHERE IS.
5. The HRA is satisfied that the Redeveloper has obtained, or will
be obtaining, fee simple title to any portions of the Phase I
Property which are not the subject of the condemnation.
6. Redeveloper has furnished the HRA with evidence that it has
funds, whether in the nature of mortgage financing, or otherwise
which are sufficient for construction of the Minimum
Improvements - Phase I.
n 7. Redeveloper has supplied the HRA with evidence that at least A
of the rentable space for Phase I has been leased.
8. Redeveloper has supplied the HRA with a signed written
a W.
statement to the effect that,
:;:.;:.::::
...
tZ upon Closing, there will be no remaining matters
; lM would affect the prompt commencement of construction of
the Minimum Improvements - Phase I and the continuation of
construction to completion. The statement must also acknowledge
that the Redeveloper understands that the HRA is relying on the
statement as a inducement to acquire and convey the Phase I
Property.
• 9. Redeveloper A b-1-- satisfied all of the preconditions
to acquisition of .ihe " lase ' Y.. Property by eminent domain; and
has requested the HRA to commence eminent domain with respect
to the portions of the Phase II Property which the Redeveloper
has not been able to acquire.
10. The parties have entered into a separate agreement providing for
the sale by the HRA to the Redeveloper of an adjacentparcel, of
X., X
land ("Church Parcel").
11. The HRA has reviewed and approved the Concept Plan.
(e) Following the date on which the HRA has obtained title and possession
of the Phase I Property it shall convey the same to the Redeveloper by quit claim
deed. Such conveyance shall take place not later than 10 days following the date
that the HRA has acquired the Phase I Property, and the Redeveloper has furnished
the HRA with evidence that all the provisions of paragraph (d) above remain true;
and all governmental approvals licenses and permits needed for construction of the
Minimum Improvements - Phase I have been obtained.
(f) On the date of Closing, and as a further precondition to the HRA's
obligations to deliver title, Redeveloper shall provide the HRA with a lien, in
recordable form and recordable against the Phase I Property. The lien shall be in
a form acceptable to the HRA and in an amount deemed by the HRA to be sufficient
JM67324
RC125-68 7
to cover i) any Phase I condemnation award in excess of the amount previously
deposited; ii) any relocation benefits not previously paid with respect to Phase I.
(g) Reimbursement of Redeveloper's Expenses. It is the intention of the
parties that the funds which Redeveloper has expended in connection with the
acquisition of the Phase I Property should be reimbursed to the extent and in the
manner hereinafter provided. It is further understood that Redeveloper would not
otherwise have undertaken such expenditures absent reimbursement. Accordingly,
at closing, the HRA shall execute and deliver to the Redeveloper a note in
substantially the form of the attached Exhibit E ("Note V). The Note I shall be paid
according to its terms and, except as provided in paragraph (h) below, will
constitute the sole and exclusive source of reimbursement to the Redeveloper for its
expenditures.
•
Section 3.3. Phase II Property. The Redeveloper shall have the primary
responsibility for acquiring the individual parcels of land which comprise the Phase
II Property; and agrees to commence and diligently pursue such activities
immediately upon the execution of this Agreement. Not later than tsa, the
Redeveloper will provide the HRA with the following information together with
supporting material:
(a) That it has undertaken to acquire all the Phase II Property.
(b) That any owner who has requested mediation has been afforded the
opportunity for mediation with respect to the purchase price to be paid
for such owner's property.
(c) That financing necessary for the acquisition of the Phase II Property
and for the construction of the Minimum Improvements - Phase II is in
the reasonable judgment of the Redeveloper likely to be available.
JW67324
RC125-68
(h) Additional Reimbursement. In addition to Note I, the HRA shall deliver
to the Redeveloper along with Note I, a payment in the amount of $500, 000.
(f) The lands with respect to which such agreements or options have not
been executed.
(g) A request that the HRA undertake condemnation activities, and the
parcels to which such activities relate, together with a deposit deemed
adequate by the HRA to cover the fees and expenses of those retained
by the HRA to provide legal, survey, appraisal relocation and title
services in connection with such acquisition. The request shall also
include a statement of whether A it is necessary for the HRA..: to
-f-e-A i„ annnrrlanna with Minnegnta Statutes. § 117.042. ` 11-iE..?".:: id
(h) If the Redeveloper supplies the items contained in paragraphs (a)-(g)
above, the HRA agrees that it will, in good faith, and following a review
and verification of the same, undertake the steps necessary to acquire
fee simple title to the portions of .:the:: Phase IIProperty ., to.:which ., the
reauest relatesd cdanoe 'tsa•tut,.... I .
(i) The acquisition of the requested portions of the Phase II Property may
be discontinued at any time that any of the following occur:
1. The Redeveloper is in default of any of. its obligations, under this.
• 2. The Redeveloper fails to make any payment with respect to the
acquisition of the Phase II Property of the payment of relocation
benefits therefore.
3. The HRA determines 3h;e€1..; ::::':: >:::
•i::::::::: :.:•:::.? iiiii'4:<•::!Mii:•i:J:J::v::;:w::::.. v: i :::::: .. ..::::::::::::::.:?..:.?... ............
that the Redeveloper's?obligation to pay for the acquisition of the
Phase II Property, or to pay relocation benefits is not adequately
secured, and the Redeveloper fails; with 30 days of a written
request by the HRA to provide security deemed adequate by the
HRA.
4.
5.
The Redeveloper establishes to the HRA's ':satisfaction
that material adverse market conditions
not reasonably anticipated:at tYie:timeconemnaton,was
PRO:
6. The costs of acquisition, including land, relocation,.,; fees.;; and
rB.
other expenses to be paid by the Redeveloper exceed Aw.
JBD67324
RC125-68 9
Actions by governmental
'i>`";;';° laced severe physical limitations on the
capacity of the Phase II Property to be developed as
contemplated'- ix.aeaoe..€th..th oneept'la.
If the HRA elects to discontinue tthe Redeveloper shall
remain responsible for all the HRAA's `costs and expenses in connection
with the Phase II Property condemnation incurred up to the effective
date of the discontinuance, and shall further be responsible to
indemnify, hold harmless and defend the HRA, its officers, agents and
employees from any claim or cause of action, or whatever nature, based
upon pre-condemnation activities, condemnation activities or
discontinuance activities. The HRA may utilize any existing security,
including the payments due Redeveloper under the Phase I Note, to
secure the Redeveloper's obligations under this paragraph.
In the event that the HRA elects not to discontinue the condemnation,
the Redeveloper shall, except in situations described in subparagraphs
4, 5, or 6 above, continue to be responsible to the HRA for all fees,
expenses, awards, damages and other payments required to be made by
the HRA including, without limitation, the payment of relocation
benefits and land valuation awards. The HRA may utilize any existing
security, including the payments due Redeveloper under the Phase I
Note to secure Redeveloper's obligations under this paragraph.
•
M
(k) Reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the Redeveloper in
connection with acquisition of the Phase II Property shall be made in
accordance with and subject to the terms of the note in substantially the
form of the attached Exhibit F ("Note III'). Payment according to its
terms will, except as provided in paragraph (m) below, constitute the
sole and exclusive manner of reimbursement to the Redeveloper for its
expenditures in connection with the Phase II Property.
(1) The HRA may condition its obligations to transfer the Phase II Property
upon the execution and delivery to it or a lien or like nature to the lien
described in such 3.2(f).
(m) At the time the HRA delivers Note II to the Redeveloper, it shall also
pay the Redeveloper $100,000 as additional reimbursement for
Redeveloper expenditures.
JW67324
RC125-68 10
Once the HRA has acquired the Phase II Property, it shall convey the
same to the Redeveloper by quit claim deed. The preconditions to such
conveyance shall be as described in Section 3.2(e) and (f) above.
ARTICLE IV
CONSTRUCTION OF MINIMUM IMPROVEMENTS
Section 4.1. Agreement to Construct. Subject to the acquisition of the
Redevelopment Property, the Redeveloper agrees that it will construct the Minimum
Improvements on each phase in accordance with the approved Concept Plans.
4.2. Demolition. The Redeveloper shall, at its sole expense, raze and remove
all structures on Redevelopment Property including any abandoned City utilities .
4.3. Soil Correction. The Redeveloper shall have the sole responsibility to
make any necessary soil correction. Neither the HRA nor the City has made any
representations concerning the nature of soils, the suitability of such soils for the
Minimum Improvements, or the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions.
4.4.
execution of lhis Agreement by the Redeveloper, " the Redeveloper shall submit
schematic Concept Plans including a marketing plan and tenant mix projections and
the anticipated dates for commencement and completion of construction. The Concept
Plans shall depict the Minimum Improvements and shall be in conformity : with this
y i? > ;y and all applicable state ana local laws auu regu.Lauuum. ii1G 11141. .711CA1a
conditions of this
a rove the Conce t Plans if. : the.. ...(a) ...c.::onform to the terms and cond?»:
:.;< ::.;:::; ..:::::.:::.:::;:::::::::::::.; ...:.......;;:..:..;.; ..:...;:........ .,..::.::. . :tl..::mo:.: ,. ;. ..<::..:..:..7 . € ::: !Ia x: .> x z e<m ..;; e;s ahaeque ...........................
A eement axh::.::<.;>:.;:.;:.;:.:>:.:;:.:::.;::.;:.:::: .:::::::::::::::::::::....... ................................
..:::::::::.:::::::::..:...............,......... .............................
;`; tb) conform to all applicable federal, state, and local law, ordinances,
rules and. 'regulations; (e) describe in reasonable detail the Minimum Improvements
(d) the Minimum Improvements described in the Concept Plans
together with the Redevelopment Property indicate; a. A market value, : in theopinion
of the Assessor of A tit#atly?£?#1r Phe aid?0,I#f P
. No approval by t1ie-HA shall: relieve the 11 edeveloper of the obligation to comply
with the terms of this Agreement, the terms of the Redevelopment Plan, applicable
federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, or to construct the
Improvements. The HRA reserves the unrestricted right to reject the Concept Plans
if in its sole discretion the HRA determines that the above referenced conditions
have not been met. Such Concept Plans shall, in any event, be deemed approved
unless rejected in writing by the HRA, in whole or in part. Such rejection shall set
forth in detail the reasons therefor, and shall be made within twenty (20) days after
the date of their receipt by the HRA. If the HRA rejects the Concept Plans in whole
or in part, the Redeveloper shall submit new or corrected Concept Plans within
twenty (20) days after written notification to the Redeveloper of the rejection. The
provisions of this Section relating to approval, rejection, and resubmission of
corrected Concept Plans shall continue to apply until the Redevelopment Plans have
been approved by the HRA, provided, however, that if the Concept Plans have not
been approved within ninety (90) days after the date of this Agreement, this
Agreement shall be null and void and the parties hereto shall thereby be relieved of
any further obligation or liability hereunder.
If the Redeveloper desires to make any change in the Concept Plans after their
approval by the HRA, the Redeveloper shall submit the proposed change to the HRA
for its approval. If the Concept Plans, as modified by the proposed change, cm to
the requirements of this Section with respect to such previously approved Concept
JBD67324
RC125-68 11
Plans, the HRA shall approve the proposed change and notify the Redeveloper in
writing of its approval Such change in the Concept Plans shall, in any event, be
deemed approved by the HRA unless rejected, in whole or in part, by written notice
by the HRA to the Redeveloper, setting forth in detail the reasons therefor. Such
rejection shall be made within twenty (20) days after receipt of the notice of such
change.
Final construction plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the City
Building Official in connection with issuance of building permits. No building permit
may be issued if the final construction plans and specifications materially depart from
the approval Concept Plans.
4.5. Commencement and Completion of Construction. The Redeveloper shall
complete the construction of all of the Phase I Minimum Improvements within twelve
(12) months after commencement of construction and the Phase II Minimum
Improvements within A 8 months following the date on which all of the Phase II
Property is conveyed to ``it . "Commencement of construction" shall mean, for the
purpose of this Agreement, the date upon which the Redeveloper has commenced soil
correction procedures. All work with respect to the Minimum Improvements to be
constructed or provided by the Redeveloper shall be in conformity with the Concept
Plans as submitted by the Redeveloper and approved by the HRA.
The Redeveloper shall not be considered in breach of, or default in its
obligations with respect to the commencement and completion of construction of the
Minimum Improvements, if the occurrence of an Unavoidable Delay requires extension
of the time or times for performance of the Redeveloper with respect to construction
of the Minimum Improvements provided, that the Redeveloper shall, within fifteen
(15) days after the beginning of any such Unavoidable Delay, have notified the HRA
thereof in writing, and of the cause or causes thereof, and further provided that the
excused delay in performance may not exceed the duration of the Unavoidable Delay,
and further provided that such excused delay may not operate to relieve Redeveloper
of its obligation to complete within the time period provided for in the Assessment
Agreement.
4.6. Construction Reports. During construction the Redeveloper shall make
reports at such times and in such detail as may be reasonably requested by the -HRA
concerning the progress of construction.
4.7 . Certificate of Completion. Promptly after notification by the Redeveloper
of completion of the Minimum Improvements for each phase contemplated by the
Concept Plans, the HRA shall inspect the construction to determine whether such
Minimum Improvements are completed substantially in accordance with the terms of
this Agreement. If the HRA is satisfied, it will furnish the Redeveloper with a
Certificate of Completion. Such certification by the HRA shall, except as further
provided in this Section 4.7, be a conclusive determination of satisfaction and
termination of the agreements and covenants in this Agreement, and in the Deed with
respect to the obligations of the Redeveloper to construct the Minimum Improvements
with respect to the Phase for which the certificate relates.
The certification provided for in this section shall be in recordable form. If
the HRA shall refuse or fail to provide the Redeveloper a certification in accordance
with the provisions of this Section 4.7, the HRA shall, within thirty (30) days after
written request by the Redeveloper, provide the Redeveloper with a written
statement, indicating in adequate detail in what respects the Redeveloper have failed
JW67324
RC125-68 12
to complete the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions of this
• Agreement, or are otherwise in default, and what measures or acts it will be
necessary, in the reasonable opinion of the HRA, for the Redeveloper to take or
perform in order to obtain such certification.
•
JBD67324
RC125-68 13
•
ARTICLE V
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
Section 5.1. [Blank]
C]
JBD67324
RC125-68 14
9
JBD67324
RC125-68
ARTICLE VI
INSURANCE
15
ARTICLE VII
TAX INCREMENT
Section 7.1. A [Blank]
0
i
JHD67324
RC125-68 16
ARTICLE VIII
FINANCING
Section 8.1. Limitations Upon Encumbrance. Prior to the completion of the
Minimum Improvements, as certified by the HRA pursuant to Section 4.8 of this
Agreement, neither the Redeveloper nor any successor in interest to the
Redevelopment Property or any part thereof shall engage in any financing or any
other transaction creating any mortgage or other encumbrance or lien upon the
Redevelopment Property or any part thereof, whether by express agreement or
operation of law, or suffer any encumbrance or lien to be made on or attached to the
Redevelopment Property or any part thereof, except only for the purpose of
obtaining funds to the extent necessary for developing the Minimum Improvements.
Default to Lender. P
8..2......... Copy of Notice ` of
............................... :::>::>::>:::>:::;::.::::.>;;>;;: x.::.>:;
, demand to
;qmp whenever the HRA shall deliver any notice or
the Redeveloper with respect to any breach or default by the Redeveloper in its
obligations under this Agreement, the HRA shall at the same time forward a copy of
such notice or demand to each holder ("Holder") known to the HRA of any mortgage
or other financing agreement authorized by this Agreement by sending such notice
to last known address of the Holder as shown in the records of the HRA.
8.3. Lender's Option to Cure Defaults. After any breach or event of default
referred to in Section 10.1 hereof, each Holder shall (insofar as the rights of the
HRA are concerned) have the right for a period of ninety (90) days, at the Holder's
• option, to cure or remedy such breach or event default to the extent that it relates
to the part of the Redevelopment Property covered by its financing and to add the
cost thereof to the debt and the lien of its financing, provided, that if the breach
or event of default is with respect to construction of the Minimum Improvements,
nothing contained in this Section or any other section of this Agreement shall be
deemed to permit or authorize such Holder, either before or after foreclosure or
action in lieu thereof, to undertake or continue the construction or completion of the
Minimum Improvements (beyond the extent necessary to conserve or protect such
Improvements or construction already made) without first having expressly assumed
the Redeveloper's obligations described in Section 10.2 hereof by written agreement
reasonably satisfactory to the HRA to complete the Minimum Improvements or the part
thereof to which the lien or title of such holder relates, provided further, however,
that the HRA win not unreasonably withhold its consent to any changes in the
Minimum Improvements which are requested by the Holder if the requested changes
do not alter the basic design of the Minimum Improvements or result in a decrease of
the Market Value below the minimum market value stipulated to in the Assessment
Agreement. Any such Holder who shall perform the Redeveloper's obligations under
Section 4.6 hereof, relating to the Redevelopment Property or applicable part
thereof, shall be entitled, upon written request made to the HRA, to a certification
by the HRA to such effect in the manner provided in Section 4.8 of this Agreement.
8.4. HRAts Option to Cure Default. P?.?:.,?.??:t????????':: :?
if the Redeveloper is in default u n er'any financing authorized pursuant
:...........::............
to Article VIII of this Agreement, the Holder, prior to exercising any of its
remedies, shall notify the HRA in writing by sending it a copy of any notice of
default sent to the Redeveloper. If, within thirty (30) days after receipt of said
notice, the HRA cures the default, then the Holder shall pursue none of its remedies
under the financing based upon the said default of the Redeveloper. A
JBD67324
RC125-68 17
ARTICLE IX
PROHIBITIONS AGAINST ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER
Section 9.1. Representation as to Development. The Redeveloper represents
and agrees that its undertaking pursuant to the Agreement are, and will be used,
for the purpose of development of the Redevelopment Property and not for
speculation in land holding. The Redeveloper further recognizes that, in view of (a)
the importance of the development of the Redevelopment Property to the general
welfare of the community; and (b) the substantial financing and other public aids
that have been made available by the City and the HRA, for the purpose of making
such development possible; that the qualifications and identify of the Redeveloper
are of particular concern to the community and the HRA. Any significant change
with respect to the identify of the Redeveloper or the purchase of Redeveloper's
interest by any other party or parties is for practical purposes a transfer or
disposition of the property then owned by the Redeveloper, the Redeveloper further
recognizes that it is because,of such qualifications and identify that the HRA is
entering into this Agreement with the Redeveloper and, in so doing, is further
willing to accept and rely on the obligations of the Redeveloper for the faithful
performance of all undertakings and covenants hereby then to be performed.
Section 9.2. Prohibition Against Transfer of Interest Bind Individually - For
the foregoing reasons, except as provided in Section 9.3 of this Agreement, the
Redeveloper represents and agrees that : prior to completion of the Minimum
Improvements as certified by the HRA, and without the prior written approval of
the. HRA, (a) there shall be no transfer of any interest in all or a portion of the
Redevelopment Property, (b) nor shall the Redeveloper suffer any such transfer to
be made, (e) nor shall there be or Oe suffered to be by the Redevelopers any other
similar significant change in the ownership of any corporate stock of the Redeveloper
or in the relative distribution thereof, or with respect to the identify of the parties
in control of the Redeveloper or the degree thereof, by any other method or means,
whether by increased capitalization, merger with another corporation, corporate or
other amendments, issuance of additional or new stock or classification of stock, or
otherwise. A transfer of corporate stock by operation of law resulting from the
death or legal incompetency of a stockholder or the transfer of the Redevelopment
Property or this Agreement to another entity in which n is a principal
shareholder or general partner shall not be deemed to violate the prohibitions of this
Section 9.2.
Section 9.3. Prohibition Against Transfer of Property and Assignment of
Agreement. For the foregoing reasons, the Redeveloper represents and agrees that :
(01) Except only by way of security for, and only for, the purpose of
obtaining financing necessary to enable the Redeveloper or any successor in interest
to the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, to perform its obligations with
respect to making the Minimum Improvements under the Agreement, and any other
purpose authorized by the Agreement, the Redeveloper (except as so authorized)
has not made or created, and that it will not make or create, or suffer to be made or
created, any total or partial sale, assignment, conveyance, or any trust or power,
or transfer in any other mode or form of or with respect to the Agreement or the
Redevelopment Property or any part thereof or any interest therein, or any contract
IS or agreement to do any of the same, without the prior written approval of the HRA.
JW67324
RC125-68 18
(02) The HRA shall be entitled to require, except as otherwise provided in
the Agreement, as conditions to any such approval that: (i) any proposed transferee
shall have the qualifications and financial responsibility, as determined by the HRA,
necessary and adequate to fulfill the obligations undertaken in the Agreement by the
Redeveloper (or, in the event the transfer is of or relates to part of the
Redevelopment Property, such obligations to the extent that they relate to such
part); (ii) any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory to the
HRA and in form recordable among the land records, shall for itself and its
successors and assigns, and expressly for the benefit of the HRA, have expressly
assumed all of the obligations of the Redeveloper under the Agreement and agreed
to be subject to the terms of the Redevelopment Plan (or, in the event the transfer
is of or relates to part of the Redevelopment Property, such obligations,, conditions,
and restrictions to the extent that they relate to such part); provided, that the fact
that any transferee of, or any other successor in -interest whatsoever the reason,
shall have assumed such obligations or agreed, shall not (unless and only to the
extent otherwise specifically provided in the Agreement or agreed to in writing by
the HRA) relieve or except such transferee or successor of or from such obligations,
conditions, or restrictions, or deprive or limit the HRA or with respect to any rights
or remedies or controls with respect to the Redevelopment Property or the
construction of the Minimum Improvements; it being the intent of this, together with
other provisions of the Agreement, that (to the fullest extent permitted by law and
equity and excepting only in the manner and to the extent specifically provided
otherwise in the Agreement) no transfer of, or change with respect to, ownership
in the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof, of any interest therein, however
consummated or occurring, and whether voluntary or involuntary, shall operate,
legally or practically, to deprive or limit the HRA of or with respect to any rights or
remedies or controls provided in or resulting from the Agreement with respect to the
Property and the construction of the Minimum Improvements that the HRA would have
had, had there been no such transfer or change; (iii) there shall be submitted to the
HRA for review all instruments and other legal documents involved in effecting
transfer, and if approved by the HRA its approval shall be indicated to the
Redeveloper in writing.
In the absence of specific written agreement by the HRA to the contrary, no
such transfer or approval by the HRA thereof shall be deemed to relieve the
Redeveloper, or any other party bound in any way by the Agreement or otherwise
with respect to the construction of the Minimum Improvements, or from any of its
obligations with respect thereto. The HRA may, however, in its reasonable
discretion exercised in accordance with the standards and requirements of Section
9.3(02) relieve Redeveloper if they present -a transferee or assignee acceptable to
the HRA.
Section 9.4. Information as to Stockholders or Partners. In order to assist
in the effectuation of the purposes of this Article IX of this Agreement, the
Redeveloper agrees that during the period between the execution of the Agreement
and completion of the Minimum Improvements as certified by the HRA, (a) the
Redeveloper will promptly notify the HRA of any and all changes whatsoever in the
ownership of stock or partnership interests, legal or beneficial which in the
aggregate exceed ten percent (10%) of the issued stock or partnership interests in
Redeveloper, or of any other act or transaction involving or resulting in any change
in the ownership or stock or partnership interests of such Redeveloper or in the
relative distribution thereof, which in the aggregate exceeds ten percent (10%) of
the issued stock or partnership interests of Redeveloper, and (b) Redeveloper shall,
at such time or times as the HRA may request, furnish the HRA with a complete
JW67324
RC125-68 19
statement, subscribed and sworn to by the President, general partner, or other
executive officer of Redeveloper, setting forth all of the stockholders or partners
of Redeveloper and the extent of their respective holdings,, and in the event any
other parties have a beneficial interest in such stock or partnership interest, their
names and the extent of such interest, all as determined or indicated by the records
of Redeveloper, by specific inquiry made by any such officer, of all parties who on
the basis of such records own ten percent (10%) or more of the stock or partnership
interest of Redeveloper, and by such other knowledge or information as such officer
shall have.
Section 9.5. Approvals. Any approval required to be given by the HRA
under this Article IX of this Agreement may be dented only in the event that the
HRA reasonably determines that the performance of the obligations of Redeveloper
under this Agreement will be materially impaired by the action for which approval is
sought. At the HRA's request, the Redeveloper shall provide to the HRA's attorney
for privileged review on behalf' of the HRA financial information as to any proposed
general partners, or controlling stockholders of proposed assignees or transferees,
and financial information as to any such partnership or corporation.
LI
i
JM67324
RC125-68 20
ARTICLE X
EVENTS OF DEFAULT
Section 10.1. Events of Default Defined. The following shall be "Events of
Default" under this Agreement and the term "Event of Default" shall mean, whenever
it is used in this Agreement (unless the context otherwise provides), any one or
more of the following events :
(01) Failure by the Redeveloper to pay when due any payments required to
be paid under Article III and Sections 4.10 and 7.1 of this Agreement .
(02) Subject to Unavoidable Delay, failure by the Redeveloper to observe and
substantially perform any covenant, conditions, obligation, or agreement on its part
to be observed or performed hereunder.
(03) If the Redeveloper shall admit in writing its inability to pay its debts
generally as they become due, or shall file a petition in bankruptcy, or shall make
an assignment for the benefit of creditors, or shall consent to the appointment of a
receiver of themselves or of the whole or any substantial part of the Redeveloper
Property.
(04) If the Redeveloper shall file a petition or answer seeking reorganization
or arrangement under the federal bankruptcy laws.
(05) If the Redeveloper, on a petition in bankruptcy filed against them, be
adjudicated a bankrupt, or a court of competent jurisdiction shall enter an order of
decree appointing, without the consent of Redeveloper, a receiver of Redeveloper
or of the whole or substantially all of its property, or approve a petition filed against
Redeveloper seeking reorganization or arrangement of Redeveloper under
bankruptcy laws, and such adjudication, order, or decree shall not be vacated or
set aside or stayed within sixty (60) days from the date of entry thereof.
(06) If the Redeveloper is in default under any mortgage and falls to cure any
such default within thirty (30) days after written demand from the HRA to do SO.
(07) If the real estate taxes are not paid when due.
Section 10:2. ° Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default referred
to in Section 10.1 of this Agreement occurs, the HRA may, in addition to any other
remedies or rights given the HRA under this Agreement, but only after at least
thirty (30) days notice to the Redeveloper and its failure to cure (unless a different
cure period is brovided with respect to specific defaults under this Agreement)
ariy `orie `or"more` of - tie -following actions :
(01) Suspend its performance under the Agreement until it receives
assurances from the Redeveloper or mortgagee reasonably deemed adequate by the
HRA, that the Redeveloper will cure the default and continue performance under the
Agreement.
JW67324
RC125-68 21
(02) Cancel pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, § 559.21, and rescind the
Agreement, in which case the 30-day cure period shall commence with notice of
cancellation.
(03) Withhold the Certificate of Completion if the Event of Default relates to
the failure of the Redeveloper to complete the improvements as provided in this
Agreement.
(04) Take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or
desirable to the HRA to collect any payments due under this Agreement, or to
enforce performance and observance of any obligation, agreement or covenant of the
Redeveloper under this Agreement.
Provided, however, that any exercise by the HRA, its successors or assigns,
of its right or remedies hereunder shall always be subject to and limited by, and
shall not defeat, render invalid or limit in any way (a) the lien of any mortgage
authorized by this Agreement and (b) any rights or interests provided in this
Agreement for the protection of the Holder of such mortgages. Provided further,
however, that should any Holder succeed by foreclosure of the mortgage or deed in
lieu thereof, to Redevelopers interest in the Redevelopment Property or any part
thereof, it shall, notwithstanding the foregoing provision, be obligated and. shall
agree in writing to perform all of the obligations of the Redeveloper, to the extent
that the same have not theretofore been performed by the Redeveloper with respect
to the Redevelopment Property or part thereof, set forth in Article III, Article IV,
Article V and Article VII. Said Holder shall have no obligations pursuant to this
Agreement other than as specifically set forth in the foregoing sentence.
Section 10.2.1. Right to Develop the Project with Others. In the event that
this Agreement is terminated cancelled or rescinded for any cause provided in
Sections 10.1 or 3.3 (01) of this Agreement or any other provisions which provides
for or triggers the right of termination, cancellation, or rescission by the HRA or
City upon any breach by the Redeveloper, the HRA and the City shall have the
further right to proceed with the Development or any part thereof with any
contractor or any other individual or entity selected by the HRA. The HRA and the
City shall have the right to obtain and use, at no cost to them, all plans,
specifications, studies, reports and other data prepared by the Redeveloper or at
the Redeveloper's direction for the Development or any phase thereof. It is
expressly agreed that the consideration for rights conferred upon the City and the
HRA under this Section 1.2.1 including business opportunity and other valuable
consideration are independently adequate to create a binding obligation under this
Section 10. and that such obligation shall survive the cancellation, rescission, or
termination of this Agreement.
Section 10.3. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or
reserved to the HRA is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or
remedies, but each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in
addition to every other remedy given under this Agreement or now or hereafter
existing at law or in equity or by statute. Except as provided in Section 10.5 of this
Agreement, no delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing upon any
default shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed to be a waiver
thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from time to time and as
. often as may be deemed expedient. In order to entitle the HRA or the Redeveloper
to exercise any remedy reserved to it, it shall not be necessary to give notice, other
than such notice as may be required in this Article X.
JW67324
RC125-68 22
Section 10. 4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. In the event any
obligation contained in this Agreement should be breached by either party and
thereafter waived by the other party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular
breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous
or subsequent breach hereunder.
•
JW67324
RC125-68 23
ARTICLE XI
ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
Section 11.1. Conflict of Interests; HRA Representatives Not Individually
Liable. No member, official, or employee of the HRA shall have any personal
interest, direct or indirect, in the Agreement, nor shall any such member, official
or employee participate in any decision relating to the Agreement which affects his
personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership, or association
in which he is, directly or indirectly, interested. No member, official, or employee
of the HRA shall be personally liable to the Redeveloper, or any successor in
interest, in the event of any default or breach by the HRA or for any amount which
may become due to the Redeveloper or successor or on any obligations under the
terms of the Agreement.
Section 11.2. Nondiscrimination. The provisions of Minnesota Statutes,
§ 181.59, which relate to civil rights and nondiscrimination, shall be considered a
part of this Agreement as though fully set forth herein.
Section 11.3. Provisions Not Merged With Deed. None of the provisions of
this Agreement art intended to be or shall be merged by reason of any Deed
transferring any interest in any part of the. Property and any such Deed shall not
be deemed to affect or impair the provisions of this Agreement. Unless otherwise
indicated in this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon
the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
Section 11.4. Notice of Status and Conformance. The HRA agrees that from
time to time, upon not less than ten (10) days' prior written notice by Redeveloper,
to execute, acknowledge and deliver, without charge, to Redeveloper or to any
person designated by Redeveloper, a statement in writing certifying, to the extent
true, that this Agreement is unmodified, the principal amount of any obligation
herein created then unpaid, that the HRA has not received any notice of default,
that to the knowledge of the HRA has not received any notice of default, that to the
knowledge of the HRA no event of default exists hereunder (or if any such event of
default does exist, specifying the same and stating that the same has been cured,
if such be the case), that the HRA to its knowledge, has no claims against the
Redeveloper hereunder, and any other information reasonably requested by the
Redeveloper. It is the intention of this Section 11.4 to provide a mechanism for
obtaining estoppel certificates which may be requested by Redeveloper's mortgagee.
Section 11.5. Use of Tax Increment. Because the Redeveloper is willing to
receive a substantial portion of the Land Writedown over time out of the Tax
Increment generated from the Redevelopment Property and the Phase H Parcel, it is
important that the HRA and Redeveloper reach an understanding concerning how the
tax increment from the District will be allocated among the Bonds and the Repayment
Note. The attached Exhibit H represents the manner of allocation which the HRA will
attempt to make.
Section 11.5A. Negotiation Agreement Terminated. The Negotiation
Agreement among the parties hereto dated November 20, 1989, is hereby terminated
and cancelled, and all parties are forever released and discharged from their
obligations thereunder.
JM67324
RC125-68 24
Section 11. 6. Legal Descriptions. Not later than July 31, 1990, the
Redeveloper shall provide the HRA with a survey of the Redevelopment Property and
the Phase II Property; which survey shall contain proper legal descriptions for such
lands.
Section 11.7. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided
in this Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication under the Agreement
by either party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered it if is
dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt
requested, or delivered personally:
As to the HRA : Housing and Redevelopment Authority
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Attention: Executive Director
As to the Redeveloper:
As to the City: City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Attention: City Manager
or at such other address with respect to either such party as that party may, from
time to time, designate in writing and forward to the other.
Section 11.7. Counterparts. This Agreement may be simultaneously executed
in any number of counterparts, all of which shall constitute one and the same
instrument.
•
JBD67324
RC125-68 25
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals as
of the day and year first above written.
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF
RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
By
Its
By
Its: Executive Director
CSM CORPORATION
By
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1994, by and , the
Chairperson and Executive Director of The Housing and Redevelopment Authority
in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS
COUNTY OF )
Notary Public
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
1994, by and , respectively,
of , on behalf of the corporation.
0 Notary Public
JM67324
RC125-68 26
EXHIBIT D
0
$1,869,036
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
LIMITED REVENUE TAX INCREMENT NOTE
(PHASE I)
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield (the
"Authority"), hereby acknowledges itself to be indebted and, for value received,
promises to pay to the order of CSM Corporation, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (the
"Owner"), solely from the source, to the extent and in the manner hereinafter
provided, the original principal amount of this Note, being One Million Eight
Hundred Sixty-nine Thousand Thirty-six Dollars ($1,869,036) (the "Principal
Amount"), together with interest thereon accrued from , at the rate
of interest of eight and one half percent (8.5%) per annum (the "Stated Rate"), in
the amount and on the dates (the "Scheduled Payment Dates") set forth on the
Payment Schedule attached as Schedule A hereto and in the amounts stated thereon
(the "Scheduled Payments"). Interest accruing from , shall be added
to principal on a semi-annual basis on each and until
Any payments on this Note shall be applied first to accrued interest and then
to the Principal Amount in respect of which such payment is made .
Each payment on this Note is payable in any coin or currency of the United
States of America which on the date of such payment is legal tender for public and
private debts and shall be made by check or draft made payable to the Owner and
mailed to the Owner at it postal address within the United States which shall be
designated from time to time by the Owner.
The Note is a special and limited obligation and not a general obligation of the
Authority, which has been issued by the Authority to aid in financing a "project,"
as defined in Minnesota Statutes, § 469.174, of the Authority within and for the
benefit of its Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area and Tax
Increment Financing District ("District").
THE NOTE IS NOT A DEBT OF THE AUTHORITY, THE CITY OF RICHFIELD,
OR THE STATE OF MINNESOTA (THE "STATE"), AND NEITHER THE AUTHORITY,
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, THE STATE NOR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION
THEREOF SHALL BE LIABLE ON THE NOTE, NOR SHALL THE NOTE BE PAYABLE
OUT OF ANY FUNDS OR PROPERTIES OTHER THAN AVAILABLE TAX INCREMENT,
AS DEFINED BELOW.
The Scheduled Payment of this Note due on any Scheduled Payment Date is
payable solely from and only to the extent that the Authority shall have received as
of such Scheduled Payment Date "Available Tax Increment," hereby defined by the
JW67324
RC125-68 D-1
i
•
This Note shall terminate and the Authority's obligation to make any payments
under this Note shall be discharged and the Authority shall have no obligation and
JW67324
RC125-68 D-2
incur no liability to make any payments hereunder immediately upon the occurrence
of an Event of Default under the Contract for Private Development, dated
1994, between the Authority and the Owner, subject to the Notice
and cure provisions of Section 9.2 thereof.
This Note shall not be payable from or constitute a charge upon any funds of
the Authority or the City of Richfield and the Authority shall not be subject to any
liability hereon or be deemed to have obligated itself to pay hereon from any funds
except the Available Tax Increments, and then only to the extent and in the manner
herein specified.
The Owner shall never have or be deemed to have the right to compel any
exercise of any taxing power of the Authority or the City of Richfield or of any other
public body, and neither the Authority or the City of Richfield nor any director,
commissioner, council member, board member, officer, employee or agent of the
Authority or the City of Richfield, nor any person executing or registering this Note
shall be liable personally hereon by reason of the issuance or registration hereof or
otherwise.
This Note shall not be transferable or assignable, in whole or in part, by the
Owner without the prior written consent of the Authority; provided that the Owner
may pledge the payments hereunder to a lender or a successor purchaser of the
project, but only with prior written notice thereof to the Authority.
This Note may be prepaid in full at any time at the option of the Authority;
and may also be prepaid at the request of the Owner, but only if the Authority first
determines that sufficient tax increment is or will be generated to permit such
prepayment.
The Authority's determination shall be incontestable. Prepayment will be
made in either event by paying to the Owner an amount equal to the face amount of
the Note (original Principal Amount) less any payments of principal made to the date
of prepayment.
This Note is issued pursuant to Resolution of the Authority and is
entitled to the benefits thereof, which Resolution is incorporated herein by
reference.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that an acts, conditions, and things
required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to have
happened, and to be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Note have
been done, have happened, and have been performed in regular and due form, time,
and manner as required by law; and that this Note, together with all other
indebtedness of the Authority or the City of Richfield outstanding on the date hereof
and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness
of the Authority or the City of Richfield to exceed any constitutional or statutory
limitation thereon.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the Authority has
caused this Note to be executed by the manual signatures of the Chairperson and the
Executive Director of the Authority and has caused this Note to be dated
1994.
JM67324
RC125-68 D-3
0 Chairperson
•
Executive Director
JBD67324
RC125-68 D-4
EXHIBIT E
0
$1,125,759
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
LIMITED REVENUE TAX INCREMENT NOTE
(PHASE II)
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield (the
"Authority"), hereby acknowledges itself to be indebted and, for value received,
promises to pay to the order of CSM Corporation, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (the
"Owner"), solely from the source, to the extent and in the manner hereinafter
provided, the original principal amount of this Note, being One Million One Hundred
Twenty-five Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-nine Dollars ($1,125,759) (the
"Principal Amount"), together with interest thereon accrued from ,
at the rate of interest of eight and one half percent (8.5%) per annum (the "Stated
Rate"), in the amount and on the dates (the "Scheduled Payment Dates") set forth
on the Payment Schedule attached as Schedule A hereto and in the amounts stated
thereon (the "Scheduled Payments"). Interest accruing from shall
be added to principal on a semi-annual basis on each and
until
Any payments on this Note shall be applied first to accrued interest and then
to the Principal Amount in respect of which such payment is made.
Each payment on this Note is payable in any coin or currency of the United
States of America which on the date of such payment is legal tender for public and
private debts and shall be made by check or draft made payable to the Owner and
mailed to the Owner at it postal address within the United States which shall be
designated from time to time by the Owner.
The Note is a special and limited obligation and not a general obligation of the
Authority, which has been issued by the Authority to aid in financing a "project,"
as defined in Minnesota Statutes, § 469.174, of the Authority within and for the
benefit of its Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area and Tax
Increment Financing District ("District").
THE NOTE IS NOT A DEBT OF THE AUTHORITY, THE CITY OF RICHFIELD,
OR THE STATE OF MINNESOTA (THE "STATE"), AND NEITHER THE AUTHORITY,
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, THE STATE NOR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION
THEREOF SHALL BE LIABLE ON THE NOTE, NOR SHALL THE NOTE BE PAYABLE
OUT OF ANY FUNDS OR PROPERTIES OTHER THAN AVAILABLE TAX INCREMENT,
AS DEFINED BELOW.
The Scheduled Payment of this Note due on any Scheduled Payment Date is
S payable solely from and only to the extent that the Authority shall have received as
of such Scheduled Payment Date "Available Tax Increment," hereby defined by the
J=6T324
RC125-68 E-1
u
This Note shall terminate and the Authority's obligation to make any payments
under this Note shall be discharged and the Authority shall have no obligation and
JBD67324
RC125-68 E-2
incur no liability to make any payments hereunder immediately upon the occurrence
of an Event of Default under the Contract for Private Development, dated
1994, between the Authority and the Owner, subject to the Notice
and cure provisions of Section 9.2 thereof.
This Note shall not be payable from or constitute a charge upon any funds of
the Authority or the City of Richfield and the Authority shall not be subject to any
liability hereon or be deemed to have obligated itself to pay hereon from any funds
except the Available Tax Increments, and then only to the extent and in the manner
herein specified.
The Owner shall never have or be deemed to have the right to compel any
exercise of any taxing power of the Authority or the City of Richfield or of any other
public body, and neither the Authority or the City of Richfield nor any director,
commissioner, council member, board member, officer, employee or agent of the
Authority or the City of Richfield, nor any person executing or registering this Note
shall be liable personally hereon by reason of the issuance or registration hereof or
otherwise.
This Note shall not be transferable or assignable, in whole or in part, by the
Owner without the prior written consent of the Authority; provided that the Owner
may pledge the payments hereunder to a lender or a successor purchaser of the
project, but only with prior written notice thereof to the Authority.
This Note may be prepaid in full at any time at the option of the Authority;
and may also be prepaid at the request of the Owner, but only if the Authority first
. determines that sufficient tax increment is or will be generated to permit such
prepayment.
The Authority's determination shall be incontestable. Prepayment will be
made in either event by paying to the Owner an amount equal to the face amount of
the Note (original Principal Amount) less any payments of principal made to the date
of prepayment.
This Note is issued pursuant to Resolution of the Authority and is
entitled to the benefits thereof, which Resolution is incorporated herein by
reference.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that an acts, conditions, and things
required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to have
happened, and to be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Note have
been done, have happened, and have been performed in regular and due form, time,
and manner as required by law; and that this Note, together with all other
indebtedness of the Authority or the City of Richfield outstanding on the date hereof
and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness
of the Authority or the City of Richfield to exceed any constitutional or statutory
limitation thereon.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the Authority has
caused this Note to be executed by the manual signatures of the Chairperson and the
Executive Director of the Authority and has caused this Note to be dated
1994.
M67324
RC125-68 E-3
0
•
0
JBD67324
RC125-68
Chairperson
Executive Director
E-4
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
16 HRA Letter No. 25
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Approval of proposed Modification No. 4 to the ILN Redevelopment
and Tax Increment Plan.
Background:
The existing ILN redevelopment and tax increment plan was based
on two premises; one, that the redevelopment project south of
77th Street would have to provide sufficient tax increment to
fund substantial portions of the 77th Street Project within the
ILN area and, two, that the redevelopment project would be that
-.;.proposed.by..The;_Robert Larsen Partners in. 1989. Since the
specifics of the CSM plan are different than the Larson proposal,
modifications are indicated.
The modification has two sections; the redevelopment project plan
and the tax increment financing district plan, each with their
respective table of contents.. The modification is not the plan
in its entirety but only the sections of the original plan which
have changed. Changes include:
? The redevelopment project plan describes the public and
private activities to be undertaken and begins on page 4-1.
• ? Page 4-3 is the development program map which illustrates the
approximate locations of the areas to be developed by "Shops
at Lyndale" and the Emerson Avenue Congregational Church.
? Pages 4-4 through 4-5 contain a description of the proposed
private development.
? Pages 4-6 through 4-10 are a discussion of the public
improvements and identify property purchased (Cloverleaf site)
and property to be purchased consistent with previous HRA
actions. Also indicated is that CSM would be responsible for
- acquiring property but the HRA,may.assist with condemnation if
necessary. CSM would also be responsible for relocation.
m
? The tax increment financing plan begins on page 4-11. Page 4-
12 references topics discussed in the redevelopment project
plan as does a portion of the text on page 4-13.
? Estimated Project Costs are discussed on page 4-13 and
illustrated in Appendix A as Sources and Uses. The Sources
and Uses information indicates a need for approximately $2.8
million in TIF assistance to provide an acceptable rate of
return to the developer.
. ? Revenue Sources are discussed on page 4-14. The primary
revenue source would be tax increment financing provided on a
"pay as you go" basis. Tax increment payments would be made
only when tax payments are received. (The CDP office
46 development within the CABA project was the first "pay as you
go tax increment district and was established in 1988.) As
noted in another HRA Letter, to be considered on March 28,
1994, the developer has indicated a need for the full tax
increment including that portion of the increment which is
paid to the fiscal disparities pool. The plan states that
such a change may be made. However, the plan also includes an
option of a cash payment in the form of a land write down.
Either option satisfies the requirements of the plan.
? Tax increment cash flows are discussed on pages 4-14 and 4-15
and illustrated in Appendix B. The cash flow shows the
projected generation of tax increment. (Again, this projected
tax increment is paid only if taxes are paid.) To project
cash flows certain assumptions are made. There are six cash
flows and each cash flow has two pages; one page is a list of
assumptions and the second page is the projected cash flow.
The assumptions for each cash flow are the same except with
regards to the fiscal disparities election. There are two
cash flows for Phase I, one with the fiscal disparity
contribution not coming from the project, page B-4 (preceded
on page B-3 by the assumption) and one showing the fiscal
disparities contribution coming from the project, page 2-7
(preceded on page B-6 by the assumptions). The organizational
format is the same for Phase II and the cash flows in which
• Phase I and II are combined.
? Page 4-15 identifies Appendix C as the section which
illustrates the impact of this proposed project on taxing
jurisdictions. Two impacts are discussed. First, if the
project were not built, there would be no impact on tax
revenue receipts. Second, if the project were built without
utilizing tax increment, potential increase in tax revenue
available to the taxing jurisdictions is illustrated in the
table titled "Impact On Tax Rates" and the "Potential Taxes"
column on page C-3 (with the fiscal disparity contribution not
coming from the project) and on page C-5 (with the fiscal
disparity contribution from the project). However, because
the site area proposed for "Shops At Lyndale" is already
developed, assistance is needed to clear the existing
improvements and make the site ready for new construction. A
developer cannot charge rents high enough to pay for the
construction of a new building and related site improvements
as well as purchase and clear the existing improvements.
Thus, the need for outside assistance. The only practical
resource available to the HRA/City is tax increment. Once the
agreed upon amount of assistance is provided and the tax
increment district ends in 2012, the increment would be shared
by all taxing jurisdictions.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution which:
1. Approves Modification No: 4 to the ILN redevelopment and tax
0 increment plans.
2. Is subject to findings by the Planning Commission.
3. Requests the City Council to hold a public hearing and
approve the plans.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The plan modification has been reviewed by legal counsel and
Publicorp representatives and is in conformance with
applicable laws and regulations.
2. Approval of the modification is necessary for the CSM
proposal to proceed.
3. This is the same modification proposal as was presented at
the March 21, 1994 meeting to discuss the modification.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Delay discussion.
2. Reject the Modification.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The other agenda items related to the CSM proposal are predicated
• on the approval of Modification No. 4.
ResWuiv?e lly submitted,
Jam Prosser
Exe Director
JDP:ds
0
C,
INTERSTATE LYNDALE NICOLLET
REDEVELOPMENT
AND
•
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
PLAN
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Modification No. 4
March 21, 1994
0
MAYOR
Martin J. Kirsch
CITY COUNCIL
Michael Sandahl, Council Member At Large
Susan Rosenberg, Ward 1
Russ Susag, Ward 2
Donald Priebe, Ward 3
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Thomas Harms, Chairperson
Joan Helmberger, Vice-Chairperson
Vern Luettinger, Secretary
Russ Susag, Member
Michael Sandahl, Member
CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
James D. Prosser
PLANNING COMMISSION
Daniel Linnihan, Chairperson
Kristal Stokes, Vice Chairperson
Timothy Erlander, Secretary
Pamela Dmytrenko, Member
Michael Gallagher, Member
Morris Nilsen, A Member
Thomas Scaglia, Member .
William Snyder, Member
Paul Wasko, Member
0
•
CITY STAFF .
Byron Wallace
Director, Community Development
Bruce Palmborg
Housing & Redevelopment Coordinator
Kathy Jablonsky
Redevelopment Specialist
William Weaver
City Planner
Shawn Drill
Zoning Administrator
Mike Eastling
City Engineer
CONSULTANTS
John B. Dean
Ronald L. Batty
HRA Legal Counsel
Holmes & Graven, Chartered
Minneapolis, MN
Sidney Inman
Mark Ruff
Publicorp, Inc.
Minneapolis, MN
Art's Pakalns
Bennet, Ringrose, Wolsfeld, Jarvis, Gardner, Inc.
Minneapolis, MN
Orr-Schelen Mayeron & Associates, Inc.
Minneapolis, MN
0
?J
NOTE TO READER
The following text represents Modification No. 4 to the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet
Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan. Only those areas of the plans requiring
revision are incorporated in this modification. To understand all of the proposed activities, the
reader is encouraged to review Modification No. 4 in conjunction with the following plans:
Original IL-N Redevelopment Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan
dated October 21, 1985
Modification No. 1 to the ILN Redevelopment Project Plan
and Tax Increment Financing Plan
dated November 25, 1985
Modification No. 2 to the ILN Redevelopment Project Plan
and Tax Increment Financing Plan
dated September 18, 1989
Modification No.3 to the. ILN Redevelopment Project Plan
and Tax Increment Financing Plan
dated June 14, 1993
[Richfield Redevelopment Project Plan
and Tax Increment Financing Plan, dated June 14, 1993]
•
•
•
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN)
MODIFICATION NO.4
PART I - REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN
Modification
PART I - REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN Original Plan No. 4
Page Page
STATUTORY AUTHORITY STATEMENT 1 4-2
MAP OF PROJECT AREA, LIST OF PARCELS, AND
LEGAL. DESCRIPTION 1 4-2
PUBLIC PURPOSE STATEMENT 9 No Chan
e
g
STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 10 No Chan
e
g
Project Area 10 No Change
Core Commercial District 13 No Change
New Development District 14 No Change
Mixed and lE hwa -Oriented Commercial District (West) 15 o Chan
ge
Mixed and Hi hwa -Oriented Commercial District (East) 15 o Change
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES 16 4-2
Anticipated Private 16 4-4
Proposed Public 19 4-6
771h Street Improvements 20 4-6
Emerson Avenue 21 No Change
Tra rc Control Si als 21 4-6
West 771/2 Street. 21 4-6
West 781h Street - West o Emerson Avenue 21 4-
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I - REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN
Original Plan
Page Modification
No. 4
Page
Proposed Public Development Activities Continued
West 781h Street - East o L dale Avenue 22 No Change
L dale Avenue 22 No Change
L ndale Avenue Bride 23 No Change
Parkin Lot Improvements 23 No Change
General Streetscape Improvements 24 4-7
Sanitary Sewer Lit Station 24 4-7
Storm-Sewer 4-7
ACQUISITION, RELOCATION AND CLEARANCE
ACTIVITIES
24
4-7
SITE PREPARATION 28 No Change
BUILDING REHABILITATION 28 No Change
VACATION OF PUBLIC LAND 28 No Change
PHYSICAL INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS/LAND USE
AND RELATED ISSUES
29
No Change
New Development District 29 No Change
Mixed and Hi hwa -Oriented Commercial District West 29 No Change
Core Commercial Distirct 30 No Change
Mixed and Hi hwa -Oriented Commercial District (East) 30 No Change
Traffic Circulation and Parkin 31 No Change
•
•
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I - REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN
Original Plan
Pa k e Modification
No. 4
Page
Traffic Circulation and Parkin Continued
Freew lAccess/Barriers 31 No Change
Area Access. 31 No Change
West 761h Street Throu h are 32 No Change
Commercial Access Through Residential Neighborhood 32 No Change
Tra ic/Parkin Conflicts in the Core Commercial District 32 No Change
Closely Spaced Intersections 32 No Change
Closely Spaced Streets 33 No Change
Narrox, West 77th Street 33 No Change
Pedestrian Circulation 33 No Change
Lack o Pedestrian Circulation System 33 No Change
Physical Conditions/Image 34 No Change
Lack o Focal Point 34 No Change
Lack o Strong Image 34 No Change
Natural Amenities 34 No Change
Views 34 No Change
Screening 35 No Change
Outdoor Storage 35 No Change
General Appearancellmqge 35 No Change
ui .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I - REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN
Original Plan
Page Modification
No. 4
Page
Conclusion 36 4-10
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 39 No Change.
PROJECT ADMINISTRATION 39 No Change
REDEVELOPEMENT PROPOSALS 39 4-10
.REHABILITATION PROGRAM 40 No Change
RELOCATION PROGRAM 41 No Change
MAINTENANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS 41 No Chan e
•
•
•
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN)
MODIFICATION NO.4
PART II - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
PART II - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
Original Plan
Page Modification
No. 4
Page
FINDINGS OF FACT 42 4-12
STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 47 4-12
LIST OF PARCELS IN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
DISTRICT
47
4-12
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 53 4-12
ACQUISITION PLAN 53 4-12
RELOCATION PLAN 53 4-12
ANTICIPATED TIMING OF ACTIVITIES 60 4-13
Private Development 60 4-13
Public Improvements 61 4-13
TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FINANCE PLAN 64 4-13
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS 64 4-13
REVENUE SOURCES 66 4-14
TIMING OF EXPENDITURES 67 4-14
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT FINANCING ASSISTANCE 69 4-14
ASSESSED VALUES 10 4-14
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART II - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
Original Plan
Page Modification
No. 4
Page
TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW 71 4-14
IMPACT ON TAXING JURISDICTIONS 78 4-15
PROJECT COST ASSUMPTIONS 81 4-15
ESTIMATED ASSESSOR'S VALUE FOR NEW
DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS
83
4-15
APPENDIX A - Sources and Uses Statement --- A-1
APPENDIX B - Project Cashflows - - - B-1
APPENDIX C - Impacts on Taxing Jurisdictions - - - C-1
•
•
E
vi
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN)
MODIFICATION WO.4
LIST OF MAPS AND EXHIBITS
•
MAP OR
EXHIBIT
NUMBER
TITLE Original
Plan
Page Modification
No. 4
Page
M-Al Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment
Project Area
2
No Change
E-I Redevelopment Project Parcels 3 4-2
E-11 Redevelopment Project Area Boundary
Description
8
No Change
M-A2 Sub-Areas 11 No Change
M-A3 Phase I Development Program and Public
Improvement Plan
17
4-3
M-A4 Acquisition, Relocation, and Clearance Plan 26 4-9
E-ID-A Properties Acquired, Phase I 27 4-7
E-III-B Properties To Be Acquired, Phase I 27 4-8
M-A5 Existing Land Use 37 No Change
M-A6 Land Use/Circulation Plan 38 No Change
M-B1 Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment
Tax Increment Financing District
45
No Chane
M-112 Building Conditions 46 No Change
.E-IV Tax Increment Financing District Parcels 48 No Change
E-V Tax Increment Financing District Boundary
Description
52
No Change
vii
LIST OF MAPS AND EXHIBITS
MAP OR
EXHIBIT
NUMBER
TITLE Original
Plan
Pa a Modification
No.4
Page
E-VI Properties Proposed To Be Acquired, Phase I 58 See 4-7
M-133 Acquisition, Relocation, and Clearance Plan 56 See 4-9
M-134 Phase I Development Program and Public
Improvement Plan
57
See 4-3
E-VII Anticipated Activity Schedule 63 See 4-5
E-VIII
Estimated Project Costs B Line Item
65 See Appendix
A
E-IX
Anticipated Source of Funds
66 See Appendix
A
APPENDIX A Sources and Uses of Funds - - - A-1
APPENDIX B Project -Cashflows - - - B-1
APPENDIX C Impacts on Taxing Jurisdictions - - - C-I
•
•
•
Viii
•
PART I
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN
MODIFICATION NO.4
•
•
4-1
I- INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
STATUTORY AUTHORITY STATEMENT
The statutory authority for the activities proposed in the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet
Redevelopment Plan, dated October 21, 1985, were conferred upon the Richfield Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (HRA) by the Minnesota Housing and Redevelopment Authorities Act,
Minn. Stat: Sec. 462.411, et seq. More specifically, Minn. Stat. Sec. 462.515 established the
requirements that a redevelopment plan be prepared by an HRA prior to undertaking property
acquisition, relocation, and redevelopment. Due to subsequent legislative changes, the authority
for any modifications to the Redevelopment Project Plan now lies within Minn. Stat. Chapter 469,
specifically at Minn. Stat. Sec. 469.001 - 469.047, inclusive, as amended.
MAP OF THE PROJECT AREA, LIST OF PARCELS, AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The list of parcels located in the project area is revised under Modification No. 4 to indicate
property subdivisions necessary to accommodate the new 77th Street right-of-way. At this
writing, the subdivisions are currently in process. Specifically, the properties impacted under the
subdivision are the "Cloverleaf Site" parcels owned by the Richfield HRA. Only the subdivision
changes are noted within Modification No. 4. - Otherwise, the list of parcels under the original
plan remains the same. The properties impacted by the subdivision are as follows:
EXHIBIT I - Redevelopment Project Parcels
Former Parcels:
Property Address Property Identification Number
7644 Emerson Avenue 33-028-24-43-0015
7600 Fremont Avenue 33-028-24-43-0016
Revised Parcels:
Property Address
(Not Available At This Time)
(Not Available At This Time)
(Not Available At This Time)
(Not Available At This Time)
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
Property Identification Number
33-028-2443-0028
33-028-24-43-0029
33-028-2443-0030
33-028-24-43-0031
As before, the redevelopment of the ILN project area will be accomplished through the efforts of
the City of Richfield, the Richfield HRA, private developers, property owners, and business
owners. Property improvements, current and future phases, will be constructed over a period of
several years. Therefore, amendments to this documents may be required from time to time as
redevelopment unfolds. The private and public developments discussed within this portion of the
plan continue to remain within Phase I, Stage II of the redevelopment process. (See original
Redevelopment Plan for further detail on the overall phasing and staging of the redevelopment of
•
•
•
4-2
n013 D DODDaa0D 0 -? - -, _ - _
CID ? D ?_o ?;
n O? 0 ;. O? ? O C, O O a 70 ? ? o o_o.? 0.0000 ?
O? 0 0 00 O O Do O
? o D 0 ?D 0? n n a?
? o Do 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
--_ »„„•
- ----- - --------------- - -- ------------
DO?DnOn DOD 0 13 013 0000 c o o 0 o 0 OI
a
13,0 n0 oo 00000 000 0 003. o0 0 O C:) c3
pOOO 00 OO?OODOOn D O O CO 00
:01]13- -- ?-OGG O Gana?°°GGGD
,0013 0 C3 C3 000oO00O 000 O D 0 0 0 0 0
70013 0000 OppOO0 0000013 0 O O 0O O ?
n??o 00000 ° ?nOO-, Do cc COO
] 0 DOOD? 00000 cc 0000 000 ? ? O O
]D O? 000000000000, O0 C313 O
T
?f• J
i
Y
III'`',r
1?11111111111
Illllllllllit
111111111111'I '
IIIIIIIililll
1111111111111
Itlllllllllll
Illlllllllflll
1111111111111
11111111111111''
1111111111111 I,
Illlitlllllllli
1111111111111;
11111111111111
IIIIII1111111?
1111111111111 .', ,
I?Illll?lll?llllllltlllll?l „
IIIIIIIIIIIIIU
Illlllllltllli'
11111111111111 I,?)
1111111111111 i
11111111111111 ,
I'I'1'I
1'I!t! 1 1!I!1!i!r '
+f?l/ I ? t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 I.
I
I IIIII
Illllllltlltllll'I'I'I'I'I'1'1'I'1'I'1'I'I'1'1
Illtlllllllllll
lllllllltll111
i I It1111ti11111I'_; '
11111111111111 ?-
III(ItI1f11111t11111f111111111
11111111111111
I Illtltlllllll
i l?l l l l l l l l l l l l l?
IIIII1111111111 ?.
tllllllllllllll -
111111111tt1111
lllllllflllllll ..
II' I ' I 'llllilllll
?IIt•'11I1'I'1'I'1'I'I'I'1'1
'
Illlltlllllllll
?II1111111111111
I1I :?I
tit
O
I t
?I t
n
_ 00000 D ? ?
. _ 1
1
I
II
1
J` t
.il II
-- - --- 111
11
I
I i l t l t l t: .' -
] OD000 ?DO.D?DQ000
700 00 00 0? "3 0 D13 000
O O o o a ,3=0130 °D
I l i i l { I I i' ? i:::i;iii i; ii;:?? ?i',•'; ?5i? :?: is / i
Itltlfltlillltl iit ,`i;i?<iI ii
Iiltltltlflllll ;:: fR;;::; i
Ititltlfltltiil <? ii •\
•. - •
I'
s,
l-
't
Old CO
O
N
s~
4) PZ
zPIC; :3 0
04004 _
U
OMW =Cn
1!
lu I
the ILN project area.) Please note that within the overall ILN redevelopment phasing and
staging, individual tracts of land for proposed developments will contain their own phasing as it
relates to construction or build out.
ANTICIPATED PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
As a portion -of the Cloverleaf Site was needed for the new 77th Street, the Richfield HRA' sold
the necessary land to the 77th Street project, thus downsizing the site somewhat. To date, no
survey has been undertaken to determine the exact size of the residual land. Until the 77th Street
right-of-way construction is completed, the interim use of the site will be to accommodate a
concrete batch plant for the 77th Street project. Modification No. 4 addresses redevelopment for
the remainder of the land in Phase I, Stage II, namely the property located in the "Mixed and
Highway Oriented District - West" area, as well as a portion of the Cloverleaf site.
CSM Corporation has entertained a redevelopment proposal, known as "The Shops At Lyndale"
for the "Mixed and Highway Oriented District - West" tract of land and a portion of the
Cloverleaf site. This land lies south of 77th Street and is bounded by ][494 at its southern
perimeter, Lyndale Avenue to the east, and Emerson Avenue to the west. Within this area, two
phases of redevelopment are proposed. Each phase will build on the next until full build-out is
achieved. The developer is anticipating acquisition of the property through negotiations. The
HRA's power of eminent domain may be used as an alternative if negotiations are not successful.
This would assure site assembly in a comprehensive, timely. manner necessary for construction
commencement in 1994.
The first phase of the project would be contained within the area bounded by Emerson Avenue on
the west and Colfax Avenue on the east. Per the preliminary site plan, Phase One would contain
three (3) anchor tenants and a new church. The detail for each of the phases is as follows:
PHASE ONE
PHASE TWO
Site Area 308,965 square feet
Number of Acres 7.09
Anchor A 45,000 square feet
Anchor B 42,000 square feet
Anchor C 25,000 square feet
Gross Bldg. Area* 112,000 square feet
Church 13,340 square feet
*Approximate Area
Site Area 411,752 square feet
Number of Acres 9.45 Acres
Stage I:
In-Line Shop 20,475 square feet
Pad Site southwest 6,000 square feet
Subtotal 26,475 square feet
Stage II:
Anchor D 35,000 square feet
Anchor E 25,000 square feet
Anchor F
feet
25,000 square
Pad Site east 5,000 square feet
Subtotal 90,000 square feet
Gross Bldg. Area* 116,475 square feet
4-4
•
•
TOTAL DEVELOPMENT
•
t
Site Area 720,717 square feet
Number of Acres 16.54
Building Area:
Phase One - retail 112,000 square feet
- church 13,340 square feet
Phase Two 116,475 square feet
Gross Bldg. Area* 241,815 square feet
*Approximate Area
The following table summarizes both Phase One and Phase Two development components.
Proposed Proposed
Development Development Type of
Initiation Completion Pro osed Develo merit
3rd Quarter, 1994 Winter, 1994 Retail center with approximately 112,000 square
feet of space, occupied by three separate, major
.retailers, located between Emerson Avenue and
Colfax Avenue and relocation of church to
Cloverleaf site; construction preceded by site
assembly through negotiated acquisition, or
eminent domain, and site clearance activities.
1995 1995 Retail stores with 20,475 square feet of space, and
Pad Site tenant of 6,000 square feet, located east
and south east, of Phase One at approximately
Colfax Avenue and 78th Street; most likely use of
Pad Site to be restaurant; construction preceded
by site assembly through acquisition (negotiated
and/or eminent domain) and site clearance
activities.
1995- 1996 Retail center with 85,000 square feet of space,
occupied by three separate retailers, and Pad Site
tenant of 5,000 square feet located between
Bryant Avenue and Aldrich Avenue; most likely
use of Pad Site to be free-standing retailer;
construction preceded by site assembly through
acquisition-(negotiated and/or eminent domain)
and site clearance activities.
4-5
All of the referenced phased development would proceed within the context of a comprehensive
plan to be formulated by the City, HRA, and developer.
PROPOSED PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
Proposed public development in Phase I, Stage II, is and has always been undertaken by the City
and HRA. The new 77th Street right-of-way is being developed in order to accommodate private
developments such as the above proposed project as well as accomplish other goals and
objectives set forth in the redevelopment project area as a whole under the original redevelopment
plan of 1985 and the modified redevelopment plan of 1989.
In addition to the City and HRA, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Minnesota
Department of Transportation (MNDOT), and other interim revenue source agencies such as the
Metropolitan Council and the of the Right-of-Way Acquisition Loan Fund (RALF) are involved in
bringing the new 77th Street right-of-way into existence.
Situated within the "Mixed and Highway-Oriented West" site is a church. Phase One of the CSM
project would include construction.of a new church on the eastern portion of the Cloverleaf site,
just west of the Phase One retail center. The HRA would sell a portion of the Cloverleaf site for
the new church.
Also, the HRA and City would assist the developer in assembling the site area by vacating
portions of public rights-of-way south of 77th Street.
77th Street Improvements
Prior to this modification, substantial funding of public improvements relied upon tax increment
revenue sources from redevelopment activities. Subsequently, other revenue sources became
available outside of redevelopment activity revenues.
Traffic Control Signals
One traffic control signal would be placed at Girard Avenue and 76th Street to control traffic
filtering into and out of the new 77th Street. Additional traffic control devices will be installed as
needed.
West 771/2 Street
The intersection of West 77 1/2 Street with Lyndale Avenue would be eliminated with Phase Two
of the CSM development proposal. However, the gas station at 77 1/2 Street and Lyndale
Avenue would remain. Access to the businesses would be from the new 77th Street. The "Pad
Site" proposed on the east end of the Phase Two, CSM project could potentially contain a curb
cut to access this building. However, no major entrance/exit to the general site would be
constructed at this location. West 77 1/2 Street may be vacated for the project.
•
4-6
West 78th Street - West of Emerson Avenue
The improvements listed within this section under the modified redevelopment plan of 1989 are
hereby revoked as they related specifically to the Cloverleaf site.
General Mreetscape Improvements
The new 77th Street right-of-way plan addresses the installation of a variety of plant materials and
other landscaping features to beautify the landscaped buffer screenwall and surrounding, adjacent
areas to compliment the project and make the area more attractive. Sidewalk improvements are
also included in this plan.
The proposed.CSM Corporation development project south of 77th Street would be part of a
planned unit development (PUD). As a result of the PUD, plans for landscaping, parking, and
lighting would be evaluated as a complete package and integrated into the 77th Street project as
well. Reviews would be undertaken by the City.
Sanitary Sewer Lift .Station
A portion of this section is hereby revoked as it related only to the hotel/office proposal of 1989.
Other related public improvements are listed in the section entitled "Proposed Public
Improvements".
Storm Sewer.
Upgrading of the storm sewer is part of the 77th Street project.
ACQUISITION, RELOCATION, AND CLEARANCE ACTIVTI'TES
In the fall of 1991, the HRA had the opportunity to purchase the Cloverleaf site and gain control
of a major portion of the ILN project area. On March 16, 1992, the HRA approved acquisition of
the Cloverleaf Site and purchased the following property on April 15, 1992:
EXHIBIT III - A: Properties Acquired, Phase I
Pro er Idemr ication Number Proper Address
33-028-24-43-0015 7644 Emerson Avenue
33-028-24-43-0016 7600 Fremont Avenue
33-028-24-43-0017 7600 Fremont Avenue
33-028-24-43-0018 7700 Fremont Avenue
Also see section titled "Map of the Project Area, List of Parcels, and Legal Description" of
Modification No. 4 to the ILN Redevelopment Plan for information on property subdivisions
related to the above parcels. The property listed on the following page would be acquired for the
CSM Corporation development proposal.
4-7
EXHIBIT III - B: Properties To be Acquired, Phase I
FEE a?E ::;
Pro er Identi lcaiion Number Pro er Address
33-028-24-43-0009 7701 Emerson Ave.
33-028-24-43-0010 7721 Emerson.Ave.
33-028-24-44-0025 7700 Colfax Ave.
33=028-24-44-0026 7714 Colfax Ave.
33-028-24-44-0027 7726 Colfax Ave.
33-028-24-44-0028 7738 Colfax Ave.
PHASE TWO-`5`t e I
Property Identification Number Property Address
33-028-24-44-0082 900 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0083 902 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0084 904 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0085 908 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0086 910 W. 77 1/2 St. .
33-028-24-44-0087 914 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0088 901 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0089 920 W. 77 1/2 St.
PHASE TWO - t, a H
Property Identification Number Property Address
33-028-24-44-0073 800 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0074 804 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0075 808 W. 77 112 St.
33-028-24-44-0076 812 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0077 816 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0078 820 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0081 805 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0080 809 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0099 801 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0100 723 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0101 719 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0097 715 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0096 705 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0095 701 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0094 716 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0093 714 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0092 712 W. 77 1/2 St.
33-028-24-44-0091 708 W. 77 1/2 St.
•
•
4-8
G
c (? 0 r7 C7 ZJ' U L) G
? ? E3, 0 ? J U O :O L] D
a a;o o? 1O -o 'O -n 0 (3 =0 P
• ?I
b.a?c,';????? I?b ?D. rrl i
4.
I ? 10 10 l 0 0? 100 ?O 1O D p A
- I I I I -r T T • l I O? p 0 f J 1i
j RO O O O? I ? ?'? ? ID IO ;? I e op
o I q. .??? • I , J I
L
13
FOR;
:?ooo
DCO_C.CC GDC C CICG 00?U [:3 C3 00 0 O O 000000
0000 I!
... D ? C 7? c C O 0 M 0 C3 C7 0000 00-0
000
I I• 0000000
I 0000000000 I i i •
D COGDO ' O? 000OO0,0C)O I I' O_D_C] °;C) CD 0000000
000000 0?0?.
?- °
° 0 i
?? i^? i ? o c r_ ?, o o c a I ? G G C] C3 C3 o r 0000000
0000
000 00.0.
0000
": C D p '7 ? OC C C OC O ? O D ! . ? ? 'm r3 'o ;p i0 000°0°00 •
0000000
-.___: .._ .__ - __?.? .,-_. .. _- ___ .•-°y°y°y°y°y°y°y°y°yO OHO OTC I I
C G C C? O C C C C: ? r- ? p O^?=?? I I n ? O ? O D O . I
000000000 (_
o000000000000000o
o
000000000°O°Op°°0°°O°000°O? •
O C a . _ . - - - - .. :? p°p°p°ppp°p°ppp°O0p°000°000 =
0 0 o C! C C C 0 0 0 0 ?? a ?? D n ?' D O O O r 00000°000°0°00000°opooopo0o'?
0000;0 000000000,
__ - _ _ _ - _ - 1- _ _ __ - - I '••• 00 O 000 O 00 000.
00 OOOOO
•.--.--._- ` - ,_,--_-_ - •! -1-?- 000000000
0000 00 00a
0
00000000000 c o c 000000000°00°0°O°0 I
e00°000ooop°c°°°°o0o°000° .
O C7 ? 'C 70 0 ',O G O O 'D 0 0 O OOp O i I? M? 'O D i0 O i °0°°°°°o°op°°o°o°0°0000o0o0e i
°°0°°°°°°p I .I
li OOOOOOO00- ..# 0000000000000! ::':{}: pop°0000000°p°pp°O°O°O°00 I i {
C D ? C? 0 0? O O OCi O O ? O C)10 `}' o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°
JJ 000
C 0COC0 G? ) 000000"60o0000000-0000000
?00000000000000000000o
L ,?.;:;:'•.??;, tooooo0000000000°000000000000000000000
oo00°00000000?
:;• 00000°0000000°00000• /-
- r:;•• ., 00000000000000000000000 0 00
o'000•00oo00000000000000000000000
I)ooooo000000000000000000000 0 0-
C r' ' ifCpG?CpGpC?C?CpC?CpCpC?00p0p0 0-0p0pCpCpC-0o000°`
G?000 o000000000000000000000000000o J? I f
000000°°°00°0000
OOOOOOOOOOOO000000000000OOOOC' (i
-.,_ ..7 )ooooo 00000°0000°
1)000000000000000000000000000
--- - ? OOO0000°0°00000000 ° 000000
- b 0000 000000000:
r.. ?• ? C i)°O O°O°O°O 0 0 ° 0 ° 0°O°O°O°p°O°OO°OO00OO°°0O°°0°°o°°p°O°OO°O° / •
C;? O. ?.C C ?] C'_J p• I )oo°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o0°o°o00°o°oooo°o°o°o°o°o° n '
0000000000°000000000000°°00 /
i )ooooo00000000000000 •
o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°°°p
00000000000000000000°00
)0000000000000000000000
?: e1 0000000000000000000000 i
0 CCC : C. C C Coco ; i )o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°0°0°0°0°0°0°0°0°O°0°?? /i'" "?, 1•
O OOO000000000000000
?,? , o?^o?o^o^o^o^0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c'i, ?i ??• ' ?.? ;
? _ -_... ! I ?4i/A!!4?03y,M ?:1.b.'fS•V ,. ?+'•?:'?•.'•nt!+?{ /?:,:•i ??
C= G
s
cv
aj"
c?
t., 31
V . /
Z r;
C)
op -d M :
b.4 or-4
CC
0
C
U
`o
v
s
Z
< C
a s
w
o°o°o
U
00cz
=t..r
`= vU
-crO V c
fi `VV CL
The developer would be responsible for acquisition of the referenced property. The HRA may
provide assistance with condemnation should the developer not be able to obtain the property
through negotiated acquisitions. All acquisition activities would be conducted according to
applicable state and federal regulations.
CSM Corporation will be responsible for.the relocation process.
All buildings which are acquired for the proposed project: would be demolished. If feasible,
buildings acquired would be sold for removal from the site.
All other descriptive activity under this section in Modification No. 2, dated September of 1989,
are hereby revoked. Much of the activity related to public rights-of-way at that. time have become
part of the 77th Street project or were part of the 1989 proposed development for the Robert
Larsen project.
CONCLUSION
The activity described under the conclusion section of Modification No. 2, dated September of
1989, is hereby amended to (1.) recognize the implementation of the new 77th Street right-of-way
and its related circulation plan; and (2.) recognize the change in use of the site known as the
Mixed and Highway Oriented District - West.
All descriptive activity relating to land use and circulation plans for the Robert Larsen project and
public improvements supporting the Robert Larsen project are hereby revoked.
REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS.
As stated earlier within Modification No. 4, CSM Corporation will be responsible for site
assembly including acquisition, relocation, and demolition. Upon the developer's request, the
HRA may assist with site assembly by utilizing its powers of eminent domain to ensure property
title and possession in a timely manner. All aspects of the development activity will be detailed in
the Contract for Private Development.
Activities not related to the CSM development project yet part of prior redevelopment plan
modifications remain as described in those plans.
4-10
•
PART II
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
MODIFICATION NO.4
E
•
4-11
INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FINDINGS OF FACT
The findings of fact are hereby confirmed as listed within the original Interstate Lyndale Nicollet
(ILN) Tax Increment Financing Plan of 1985.
STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The statement of goals and objectives listed within the tax increment plan for the Richfield
Redevelopment Tax Increment District, dated June 14, 1993 are hereby confirmed.
LIST OF PARCELS, AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The list of parcels and legal descriptions enumerated within the tax increment plan for the
Richfield Redevelopment Tax Increment District, dated June 14, 1993 are hereby confirmed.
Modification No. 4 to the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area amended the project area
parcels to accommodate property subdivisions resulting from the new 77th Street as well as
additional property acquisitions by the HRA. This reference is also necessary for the tax
increment plan. Therefore, the section entitled "Map of the Project Area, List of Parcels, and
Legal Description" under Modification No. 4 to the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area
is hereby adopted by reference.
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
The Development Program for Modification No. 4 is discussed under the Redevelopment Project
Plan (Modification No. 4). Both proposed private and public development activities are
identified. Therefore, the section entitled "Development Activities" under Modification No. 4 to
the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area is hereby adopted by reference.
ACQUISITION PLAN
As stated within Modification No. 4 under the Redevelopment Project Plan, the developer would
bear significant responsibility for acquisition of the property listed for acquisition. The HRA may
assist in acquisition activities so that the developer would obtain title and possession of property
in a timely manner: This implies that the HRA may exercise its powers of eminent domain, or
condemnation, on property for which negotiations are not successful. The section entitled
"Acquisition, Relocation, and Clearance Activities" under Modification No. 4 to the
Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area provides additional information and is hereby
adopted by reference.
RELOCATION PLAN
Relocation activities pertaining to the CSM development project can be found within the section
titled "Acquisition, Relocation, and Clearance Activities". under.Modification No. 4 to the
Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area. This section is hereby adopted by reference.
4-12
ANTICIPATED TIMING OF ACTIVITIES
In general, the timing of private and public activities have been addressed in prior modifications to
the ILN Redevelopment Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan. The timing of activities
specific to the current CSM development project are listed within the section titled "Anticipated
Private Development Activities" of Modification No. 4 for the ILN Redevelopment Project Plan
which is hereby adopted by reference.
Anticipated Timinz of Activities - Private Development
See descriptive above in section titled "Anticipated Timing of Activities."
All references to prior private redevelopment projects are hereby revoked.
Anticipated Timing ofActivides - Public Improvements
See descriptive above in section titled "Anticipated Timing of Activities."
TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FINANCE PLAN
The sections which follow represent the cashflows, sources and uses statement (budget), and
impacts on taxing jurisdictions as they specifically relate to the CSM development project for
which Modification No. 4 was undertaken.
It was necessary to make certain assumptions regarding income, costs, inflation, and timing of the
tax increment financing district. These. assumptions are based on discussions with the ERA, City,
staff, consultants, and the develope. .
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS
The estimated project costs are represented as a Sources and uses statement. This statement is
provided by the developer, CSM Corporation and was reviewed by the City and HRA and
analyzed by the City's fiscal consultants, Publicorp, Inc. See Appendix A - Sources and Uses
Statement.
As one can see, the Sources and Uses Statement is detailed based on the different phases of the
project. Toward the end of Appendix A, both phases are combined to show an aggregate total.
Shown at the top of each respective statement is the amount of tax increment necessary to sustain
the project. For example, Phase One shows that with tax increment assistance, approximately
$2,821,024 of increment is required in order to provide a rate of return that is acceptable to the
developer in order to make the project feasible. Without tax increment assistance, the rate of
return for Phase One is only 0.86%. This rate. of return and level of risk would not be acceptable
to any developer for a project of this magnitude. But for the assistance of tax increment, this
project would not be possible. This directly ties into the "But For" test for the project whose
• burden of proof lies with the developer.
4-13
REVENUE SOURCES
The revenue source for the CSM development project will be tax increment. No new general
obligation bond sales are contemplated. The pay out of the tax increment will be on a "pay-as-
you-go" basis. That is, tax increment payments will be made to the developer to pay for legally
allowable,. authorized project costs as tax increment is generated by the project. If taxes are not
paid, payments will not be made to CSM. In order to obtain a maximum value for loan
indebtedness, 100% of the captured value and, in turn, tax increments generated from the CSM
development project, will be used for debt service.
The estimated tax increment to be paid may require a change in the fiscal disparities sharing of the
ILN tax increment district in order to make the project feasible. That is, a selection may be made
in order that the project not contribute to the fiscal disparities pool. The city as a whole would
absorb the ILN's portion of the fiscal disparities contribution. This in turn would provide for the
necessary level of increment required for the project. Should the project contribute to the fiscal
disparities pool and, therefore, avoid spreading the contribution to the city as a .whole, an amount
amenable to both the city and developer will be made from the balance of the ILN tax increment
district to cover the shortfall of necessary increment.
The project cashflows presented in Appendix B shows the cashflows with the fiscal disparities
change election and without. See section titled "Tax Increment.Cashflow" below for further
detail.
TIMING OF EXPENDITURES
The developer of "The Shops at Lyndale" will pay for project expenditures. The developer would
be reimbursed for project costs as tax increments are generated by the project. See above
sections for further detail.
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT FINANCING ASSISTANCE
See above sections for further detail.
ASSESSED VALUES
The estimated market value of the CSM development project is detailed in the attached tax
increment cashflow.
TAX INCREMENT CASHFLOW
The estimated tax increment cashflows of the CSM development project is detailed in Appendix
B - Project Cashflows.
Again, each of the project phases has a cashflow. Both phases are combined at the end of
Appendix B for an aggregate total. Furthermore, each phase and combined phase has two
cashflows, one in which fiscal disparities assistance is used and one for which it is not.
4-14
The first page of each cashflow provides background information, such as basic assumptions,
property tax class rates, and base tax capacity for the project parcels. The second page provides
the specific detail with respect to the project such as market values, tax capacity based on the
market values, and the cashflow itself. In general, the cashflow, ties in with the Sources and Uses
Statement. Please be reminded that the cashflow figures shown are estimates based on certain
assumptions made. Figures will reconcile within a range rather than a specific dollar or value
amount.
IMPACT ON TAXING JURISDICTIONS
The overall analysis regarding an estimate of impact on taxing jurisdictions resulting from the
CSM development project is detailed in Appendix C - Impacts on Taxing Jurisdictions.
Please note there are two impact analyses within Appendix C, the first one with the fiscal
disparities change election and the second one without.
PROJECT COST ASSUMPTIONS
Project cost assumptions are enumerated within the Sources and Uses statement and related
descriptive paragraphs within this plan.
ESTIMATED ASSESSOR'S VALUE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS
Estimated assessor's value for the CSM development project are listed directly on the cashflows
•
4-15
•
APPENDIX A
SOURCES AND USES STATEMENT
0-
A-1
PHASE I
•
•
A-2
SHOPS AT LYND.ALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS
CITY OF RICHFIELD
11-Mar-94
PHASE I
11-2.000 SQUARE FEET
MORTGAGE
EOUITY
TAX INCREMENT
TOTAL SOURCES
LAND
DEMOLITION
ENVIRONMENTAL/SOIL TESTING
SOIL CORRECTION
OFFSITE WATER PONDING
TOTAL LAND COSTS
RETAIL 1 TURNKEY 45,000
RETAIL 2 TURNKEY 42,000
RETAIL 3 TURNKEY 25,000
RETAIL 4 TURNKEY 0
RETAIL 5 TURNKEY 0
RETAIL 6 TURNKEY 0
SMALL SHOPS 0
PADS 0
SITEWO RK 112,000
CONST. CONTINGENCY 3.0%:
TOTAL CONSRUCTION COSTS
ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING
SURVEY/TITLE
LEASING FEES/MARKETING
OVERHEAD
CONSTRUCTION INTEREST
LOAN PLACEMENT FEES
SOFT COST CONTINGENCY 3.0%
TOTAL SOFT COSTS
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT
SOURCES AND USES
SOURCES
s
9,604,327 75.0:
3,201,442 25.0:
---------------------
12,805,769 100.0:
USES
5,3700300 41.9%
200,000 1.6:
50,000 0.4:
125,000 1.0%
100,000 0.8:
59845,300 45.6%
$34.00 1,530,000
$34.00 1,428,000
$36.00 900,000
0
0
0
0
$9.00 1,008,000
145.980
5,011,980
$2.50 280,000
$0.15 16,800
$3.50 392,000
$1.00 112,000
8.5% 990,937
100,000
56,752
1,948,489
11.9%
11.2%
7.0%
WITH TAX INCREMENT
SOURCES AND USES
SOURCES
6,783,303 53.0'.
3,201,442 25.0:
2,821,024 22.0%
12,805,769
USES
5,370,300 41.9:
200,000 1.6%
50,000 0.4%
129,000 1.0:
100,000 0.8
5,845,300 45.6:
1,530,000 11.9:
1,428,000 11.2:
900,000 7.0:
7.9% 1,008,000 7.9:
1.1% 145,980
- ------- 1.1%
39.1: -- --
5,011,980 39.1:
2.2% 280,000 2.2%
0.1%; 16,800 0.1%
3.1% 392,000 3.1':
0.9% 112,000
7.7% . 990 , 937 7.'7%-
0.8% 100,000
56,752
0.0% ----------- 0.0%
15.2: 1.948.489
12,805,769 100.0% 12,805,769
•
A-3
SHOPS AT LYNDALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS
0Y OF RICHFIELD
Mar-94
RETAIL 1
RETAIL
RETAIL 3
RETAIL 4
RETAIL 5
RETAIL 6
SMALL SHOPS
PADS
TOTAL RENTAL INCOME
EXPENSE RECOVERY
----------------
CAM
TAXES
INSURANCE
MANAGEMENT FEES
TOTAL RECOVERIES
POTENTIAL GROSS INCOME
EDIT/VACANCY RESERVE
EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME
OPERATING EXPENSES.
------------------
CAM
TAXES
INSURANCE
MGMT FEES
STRUCTURAL RESERVES
TOTAL EXPENSES
NET OPERATING INCOME
MORTGAGE PAYMENT
WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT
INCOME STATEMENT
----------------
45,000 $12.00 540,000
42,000 $10.00 420,000
125.000 $11.50 287,500
1,247,500
1.25 PSF 140,000
4.00 PSF 448,000
0.10 PSF 11,2200
0
599,200
1,846,700
7.0% (129,269)
1,717,431
1.25 PSF
4.00 PSF
0.10 PSF
5.0%INCOME
0.25 PSF
20 YEAR TERM
8.52INTEREST.
90604,327 PRINCIPAL
NET INCOME
RETURN ON EQUITY
0
140,000
448,000
11,200
62,375
28,000
689,575
1,027,856
1,000,183
27,673
0.86%
A-4
WITH TAX INCREMENT
INCOME STATEMENT
540;000
420,000
2287,500 .
1,247,500
140,000
448,000
11,200
599,200
1,846,700
--(129-269)
1,717,431
140,000
448,000
11,200
62,375
28,000
689,575
1,027,856
20 YEAR TERM
8.5INTEREST
706,405
321,451
10.04%
•
PHASE II
•
A-5
SHOPS AT LYNDALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS
ITY OF RICHFIELD
1-Mar-94
WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT WITH TAX INCREMENT
PHASE II 116,475 SQUARE FEET SOURCES AND USES SOURCES AND USES
SOURCES
SOURCES
MORTGAGE 9.170,071 75.0 7.1022.916 58.1%
EQUITY 3.056.690 25.0%: 3,056,690 25.0':
2,067,155 16.9%
TAX INCREMENT ---------- ---------- -----------
TOTAL SOURCES 12,2126.761 100.0%, 12,226,761
USES USES
LAND 4,562,608 37.3%: 4,562,608 37.3%:
DEMOLITION 300,000 2.5%
4 50 30.000
000
5 2.51
0.4%:
ENVIRONMENTAL/SOIL TESTING 50.000 :
0.
6:
0 ,
000
75 0.6%:
SOIL CORRECTION 75,000 . ,
0 0%
0
OFFSITE WATER PONDING 0
------ 04:
----------- .
TOTAL LAND COSTS --
49987,608 40.8%' 4,987,608 40.8%
RETAIL 1 TURNKEY .0 0 0.0% 0
0 0.0%
0%
0
RETAIL 2 TURNKEY 0 0
0 0.0:
0:
0
0 .
0.0%
0
RETAIL 3 TURNKEY.
ETAIL 4 TURNKEY 35,000 $34.00 1,190000 .
9.7: 1,190,000 . 9.7%
ETAIL 5 TURNKEY 25,000 $34.00 850.000 7.0% 850,000 7.0.
0
7
RETAIL 6 TURNKEY 25.000 134.00 850,000 7.0%:
5
9% 850,000
625
716 .
5.9%
SMALL SHOPS 20,475
000
11 $35.00
$45.00 716,625
495.000 .
4.0: .
495,000 4.0%
,
PADS
SITEWORK 116,475 $9.00 1,048,275 8.6: 1,048.275 8.6
COSST. CONTINGENCY 3.0% 154,497 1.3: __-154_497- 1.3
TOTAL CONSRUCTION COSTS 5,304,397 43.4% 5,304,397 43.4%:
ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING $2.50 291,188 2.4%
% 291,188
471
17 2.4%
0.1%
SURVEY/TITLE $0.15
50
13 17,471
407
663 0.1 ,
407,663 3.3%
LEASING FEES/MARKETING .
00
$1 ,
475
116 1.0% 116,475 1.0%
OVERHEAD
CONSTRUCTION INTEREST .
8.5 ,
% 945,608 7.7% 945,608 7.7%
8
0
LOAN PLACEMENT FEES 100,000 0.6%
5: 1001000
352
56 .
0.5%
SOFT COST CONTINGENCY 3.0% 56,352 0. ,
___- -
TOTAL SOFT COSTS 1,934,756 15.81: 1,934,756 15.8':
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 120226,761 100.0: 12,2260761 100.0%
11
A-6
SHOWS AT LYNDALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS
CITY OF RICHFIELD
ii-Mar-94
WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT
INCOME STATEMENT
--------------
RETAIL 1 0 --
0
RETAIL 0 0
RETAIL. 0 0 ..
RETAIL 4 35.000 $11.00 385,000
RETAIL 5 25,000 $10.25 256.250
RETAIL 6 25.000 $10.50 262.500
SMALL SHOPS 20,475 $12.00 245.700
PADS 11,000 $15.00 165,000
TOTAL RENTAL INCOME 1,314.450
EXPENSE RECOVERY
CAM 1.25 PSF
TAXES 4.00 PSF
INSURANCE 0.10 PSF
MANAGEMENT FEES 5.0%
TOTAL-RECOVERIES
POTENTIAL GROSS INCOME
CREDIT/VACANCY RESERVE
EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME
OPERATING EXPENSES
------------------
145,594
465,900
11,648
20,535
- -----------
643,676
1,958,126
7.0 (137,069)
1,821,057
CAM 1.25 PSF
TAXES 4.00 PSF
INSURANCE 0.10 PSF
"GMT FEES 5.0INCOME
STRUCTURAL RESERVES 0.25 PSF
TOTAL EXPENSES
NET OPERATING INCOME
MORTGAGE PAYMENT
20 YEAR TERM
8.5:INTEREST
9,170,071 PRINCIPAL
NET INCOME
RETURN ON EQUITY
145.594
465,900
11,648
65,723
29,119
-----------
717.983
1,103,075
954 , 960
148.115
4.85:
739,689
363,386
11.89%
•
A-7
WITH TAX INCREMENT
INCOME STATEMENT
----------------
0
0
0
385.000
256.250
262,500
245,700
--165_000
- -
1,314.450
145,594
465,900
11,648
643,676
1,958,126
(137,069)
1,821,057
145.594
465,900
11,648
65,723
29,119
717,983
1,103,075
20 YEAR TERM
8.5 :INTEREST
•
PHASE I & PHASE II
•
•
A-8
SHOPS AT LYNDALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS
CITY'OF RICHFIELD
11-Mar-94
PHASES 1/II
MORTGAGE
EQUITY
TAX INCREMENT
228.475 SQUARE FEET
TOTAL SOURCES
WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT
SOURCES AND USES
SOURCES
18.774, 98 75.0%
6.258.13 25.0:
---------------------
25.032.530 100.0:
WITH TAX INCREMENT
SOURCES AND USES
.SOURCES
$
13,886,219 55.
6,^258,13" 25.0%:
4.888.179 19.5%:
25,032,530
USES USES
LAND 9,932,908 39.5: 9,932,908 39.5%
DEMOLITION 500,000 2.0: 500,000 2.0%:
ENVIRONMENTAL/SOIL TESTING 100,000 0.42 100,000 0.4%
SOIL CORRECTION 200,000 0.8: 200,000 0.6%
OFFSITE WATER PONDING 100,000
----------- 0.4% 1009000
----------- 0.4%
TOTAL LAND COSTS 10,8329908 43..1y 10,832,908 43.1%
RETAIL i TURNKEY 45,000 $34.00 19530,000 6.1% 195300000 6.1:
RETAIL 2 TURNKEY 42,000 $36.00 1,5129000 6.0% 1,512,000 6.0:
RETAIL 3 TURNKEY- 25,000 $36.00 900,000 3.6% 900,000 3.6:
7%
4
RETAIL 4 TURNKEY 35,000 $34.00 1,190,000 4.7% 11,190,000 .
RETAIL 5 TURNKEY 25,000. $34.00 850,000 3.4% 850,000 3
RETAIL 6 TURNKEY 25,000 $34.00- 850,000 3.4%
9% 850,000
625
716 3.
2.9:
SMALL SHOPS 20,475
000
11 $35.00
$45.00 716,625
495,000 2.
2.0% ,
495,000 2.0%
PADS
SITEWORK ,
228,475 $9.00 20056,275 8.2% 29056,275 8.2:
CONTT. CONTINGENCY 3.0 30229997 1.2: 3029997
_ _ 1.2:
TOTAL'CONSRUCTION COSTS 10,402,897 41.4% 10,402,897. 41.4%
ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING $2.50 571,188 2.3: 571,188 2.3%
1%
0
SURVEY/TITLE $0.15 34,271 0.1:
2%
3 349271
663
799 .
3.2%
LEASING FEES/MARKETING $3.50 799,663 .
9 ,
475
228 0.9%
OVERHEAD
CONSTRUCTION INTEREST $1.00 228,475
8.5: 1,943,899 %
0.
7.7% 9
1,943,899 7.7:
LOAN PLACEMENT FEES 200,000 0.8:
5% 2009000
325
113 0.8%
0.5%
SOFT COST CONTINGENCY 3.0% 1139325 0. _
,
_
TOTAL SOFT COSTS 3,890,820 15.5% 39890,8220 15.5%
TOTAL.PROJECT COSTS 25,126,625 100.0: 25,126,625 100.0:
•
A-9
SHOPS AT LYNDALE'SUT FOR ANALYSIS
ITY OF RICHFIELD
461-Mar-94
WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT
RETAIL 1
RETAIL 2
RETAIL',
RETAIL 4
RETAIL 5
RETAIL 6
SMALL SHOPS
PADS
TOTAL RENTAL INCOME
EXPENSE RECOVERY
CAM
TAXES
INSURANCE
MANAGEMENT FEES
TOTAL RECOVERIES
4fREDIT/VACANCY TENTIAL GROSS INCOME
RESERVE
EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME
OPERATING EXPENSES
CAM
TAXES
INSURANCE
MGMT FEES
STRUCTURAL RESERVES
TOTAL EXPENSES
NET OPERATING INCOME
MORTGAGE PAYMENT
INCOME STATEMENT
-----------
45.000 $12.60 -----
540.000
42,000 $10.00 420,000
25,000 $11.50 287,500-
35,000 $11.00 385,000
25,000 $10.25 256,250
25,000 $10.50 262,500
20,475 $12.00 245,700
11,000 $15.00 165,000
2,561,950
1.25 PSF 285,594
4.00 PSF 913,900
0.'10 PSF 22,848
5.0: 20,535
1,242,876
3,804,826
7.0% (266,338)
------------
3,538,488
1.25 PSF
4.00 PSF.
0.10 PSF
5.0%INCOME
0.25 PSF
20 YEAR TERM
8.5 :INTEREST.
18,774,398 PRINCIPAL
NET INCOME
RETURN ON EQUITY
0
285,594
913,900
22,848
128,098
57,119
1,407,558
2,130,931
1,955,143
-----------
175,788
2.61%.
WITH TAX INCREMENT
INCOME STATEMENT
---------------
540.000
420,000
287,500
385,000.
256,250
262,500
245,700
165,000
2,561,950
285,594
913,900
22,848
1,242,876
3,804,826
(266,338)
3,538,488
285,594
913,900
22,848
128,098
57,119
1,407,558
2,130,931
20 YEAR TERM
8.5 :INTEREST
1,446,094
684,837
10.94%
A-10
•
APPENDIX B
PROJECT CASHFLOWS
•
•
B-1
•
PHASE I
(With Fiscal Disparities Election Change)
B-2
03116/94 City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project PHASE 1- $4.00 -.3% Inflation Page 1
SHADED AREAS MAY REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION
District: I.L.N.
Inflation Rate 3.0000%
Present Value Rate 8.50%
Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 0.0000%
Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190
Year District Created:
First Year of Increment:
Last Date of TI Paymen
Nov. 1985
June 1987
PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES - PAY 1994
APARTMENT 3.400%
COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600%
COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000%
COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600%
NONHMSTD RESID 2.300%
HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000%
HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000%
HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000%
VACANT LAND 4.600%
ID BASE TAX CAPACITY
BASE
MARKET PROPERTY
VALUE TYPE
BASE
TAX
CAPACITY
33-028-2443-0009 0 R 0
33-028-24-43.0010 1,470,000 A 49,980
cioverieaf 33-028-24-43-0015 114,000 LC NIA
cioverieaf 33-028-24-43-0016 500,000 R NIA
cloverleaf 33-028-24.43-0017 226,000 LC N/A
cioverioaf 33-028-24113-0018 740,200 CC N/A
33-028-24-44-0025 146,900 VL 6,757
33-028-24-44-0026 94,700 CC 2,841
33-028-2444-0027 166,500 C 7,659
33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 2,754
33-028-2444-0028 87,500 R 1,030
33-028-2444-0073 147,300 CC 0
33-028-2444-0074 108,900 C 0
33-028-2444-0075 107,100 CC 0
33-028-2444-0076 119,700 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0077 91,200 C 0
33-028-2444-0078 78,100 CC 0
33-028-24444M 283,500 CC 0
33-028-2444-0081 78,700 C 0
33-028-2444-0082 91,200 C 0
33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 0
33-028-2444-0084 135,100 C 0
33-028-2444-0085 87,200 CC 0 _
33-028-2444-0086 75,100 C 0
33-028-2444-0087 230,600 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0088 128,400 CC 0
33-028-2444-0089 393,100 CC 0
33-028-2444-0090 216,600 CC 0
33-028-2444-0091 110,600 CC 0
33-028-2444-0092 53,800 C 0 .
33-028-2444-0093 53,800 C 0
33-028-2444-0094 100,300 CC 0
33-028-2444-0095 55,400 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0095 64,000 R 0
33-028-24444M 232,000 C 0
33-028-2444-0097 148,100 CC 0
33-028-24440099 295,100 CC 0,
33-028-2444-0100 221,100 C 0
33-028-2444-0101 150,800 CC 0
7,622.700 71,021
B-3
•
0.
•
RI100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - F$sae review all assumptions. CSM94A
03116/94 City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project PHASE 1- $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 2
Development Type
Market
Values PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION
Square Tax Taxes
Feet Capacity /Sq. Ft.
Construct
Payable'
Retail Phase I A 2,849,600 45,000 131,082 4.00 1994 19%
Retail Phase I B 2,659,600 42,000 122,343 4.00 1994 19%
Retail Phase I C 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996
Retail D 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19%
Retail C 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail E 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail F 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail G 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail H 0 0 ' 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail 1 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail J 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19%
Retail K 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19%
Retail L 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail M 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail N 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail O 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996'
TOTALS 7,092,300 112,000 326,248
TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW
Beginning Period Annual Project Fis. Dis. Captured Semi-Annual Admin Semi-Annual Ending Period
Base Tax Tax Tax Capacity Tax Gross Tax Payment Net Tax
Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity 0.00% Capacity .Increment 10.00% Increment Yrs. Mth. Yr.
0.002-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 0.508-01 1994
0.508-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.002-01 1995
1.002-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.508-01 1995 i
1.5 08-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 2.002-01 19%
2.002-01 1996 71,021 326,248 0 255,226 175,237 17,524 157,713 2.508-01 19961
.508-01 1996 71,021 326,248 0 255,226 175,237 17,524 157,713 3.002-01 1997'
.002-01 1997 71,021 336,035 0 265,014 181,957 18,196 163,761 3.508-01 1997
3.508-01 1997 71,021 336,035 0 265,014 181,957 18,196 163,761 4.0 02-01 19981
4.002-01 1998 71,021 346,1'16 0 275,095 188,879 18,888 169,991 4.508-01 1998
4.508-01 1998 71,021 346,116 0 275,095 188,879 18,888 169,991 5.002-01 1999
5.002-01 1999 71,021 356,500 0 285,478 196,008 19,601 176,407 5.508-01 1999
5.508-01 1999 71,021 356,500 0 285,478 196,008 19,601 176,407 6.002-01 2000
6.002-01 2000 71,021 367,195 0 296,173 203,351 20,335 183,016 6.508-01 2000
6.508-01 2000 71,021 -367,195 0 296,173 203,351 20,335 183,016 7.002-01 2001
7.002-01 2001 71,021 378,210 0 307,189 210,914 21,091 189,823 7.508-01 2001
7.508-01 2001 71,021 378,210 0 307,189 210,914 21,091 189,823 8.002-01 2002
8.002-01 2002 71,021 389,557 0 318,535 218,705 21,870 196,834 8.508-01 2002
8.508-01 2002 71,021 389,557 0 318,535 218,705 21,870 196,834 0.002-01 2003
9.002-01 2003 .
71,021 401,243 0 330,222 226,729 22,673 204,056 9.508-01 2003
9.508-01 2003 71,021 401,243 0 330,222 226,729 22,673 204,056 10.002-01 2004
10.002-01 2004 71,021 413,281 0 342,259 234,994 23,499 211,494 10.508-01 2004
10.508-01 2004 71,021 413,281 0 342,259 234,994 23,499 211,494 11.002-01 2005
11.002-01 2005 71,021 425,679 0 354,658 243,506 24,351 219,156 11.508-01 2005
11.508-01 2005 71,021 425,679 0 354,658 243,506 24,351 219,156 12.002-01 2006
12.002-01 2006 71,021 438,450 0 367,428 252,274 25,227 227,047 12.5-08-01 2006
12.508-01 2006 71,021 438,450 0 367,428 252,274 25,227 227,047 13.002-01 2007
13.002-01 2007 71,021 451,603 0 380,582 261,305 26,131 235,175 13.508-01 2007
13.508-01 2007 71,021 451,603 0 380,582 261,305 26,131 235,175 14.0 02-01 2008
14.002-01 2008 71,021 .465.151 0 394,130 270,608 27,061 243,547 14.5o8-01 2008
14.508-01 2008 71,021 465,151 0 394,130 270,608 27,061 243,547 15.002-01 2009
15.002-01 2009 71,021 479,106 0 408,084 280,189 28,019 252,170 15.508-01 2009
15.508-01 2009 71,021 479,106 0 408,084 280,189 28,019 252,170 16.002-01 2010
16.002-01 2010 71,021 493,479 0 422,457 290,057 29,006 261,051 16.508-01 2010
16.508-01 2010 . .71,021 493,479 0 422,457 290,057 29,006 261,051 17.0 02-01 2011
17.002-01 2011 71,021 508,283 0 437,262 300,222 30,022 270,200 17.508-01 2011
17.508-01 2011 71,021 508,283 0 437,262 300,222 30,022 270,200. 18.002-01 2012
TOTALS 7,469,869 746.987 6,722,882
PRESENT VALUE 3,215,364 321,536 2,893,828
r
L
r
B-4
R1100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc.$Rwase review all assumptions. CSM94A
PHASE I
(Without Fiscal Disparities Election Change)
•
B-5
03116/94 City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project PHASE 1- $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 1
•
•
•
BASIC ASSUMPTIONS
SHADED AREAS MAY. REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION .
District: I.L.N.
Inflation Rate 3.0000%
Present Value Rate 8.50%
Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 15.0000%
Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190
Year District Created: Nov. 1985.
First Year of Increment: June 1987
Last Date of TI Payment: June 2011
PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES - PAY 1994
APARTMENT 3.400%
COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600%
COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000%
COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600%
NONHMSTD RESID 2.300%
HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000%
HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000%
HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000%
VACANT LAND 4.6000/6'
ID BASE TAX CAPACITY
BASE
MARKET PROPERTY
VALUE TYPE
BASE
TAX
CAPACITY
33-028-24-43.0009 0 R 0
33-028-24-43-0010 1,470,000 A 49,980
ciover7eef 33-028-24-43.0015 114,000 LC NIA .
cioveriear 33-028-24-43.0016 500,000 R NIA
cia,erled 33-028-24-43.0017 226,000 LC NIA
cieverieer 33-028-24-43.0018 740,200 CC NIA
33-028-2444-0025 146,900 VL 6,757
33-028.24-44-0026 94;700 CC 2,841
33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 7,659
33-028-24440028 91,800 CC 2,754
33-028-24440028 87,500 R 1,030
33-028-2444-0073 147,300 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 0
33-028-24-44-0075 107,100 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0076 119,700 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0077 91,200 C 0
33-028-24-440078 78,100 CC 0
33-028-2444-0080 283,500 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0081 78,700 C 0
33-028-24-44-0082 91,200 C 0
33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0084 135,100 C 0
33-028-2444-0085 87,200 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0086 75,100 C 0
33-028-2444-0087 230,600 CC 0
33-028-24-440088 128,400 CC 0
33-028-2444-0089 393,100 CC 0
33-028-2444.0090 216,600 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0091 110,600 CC 0
33-028-2444-0092 53,800 C 0
33-028-2444-0093 53,800 C 0
33-028-24440094 100,300 CC 0
33-028-2444-0095 55,400 CC 0
33-028-2444-0095 64,000 R 0
33-028-24440096 232,000 C 0
33-028-2444-0097 148,100 CC 0
33-028-2444-0099 295,100 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0100 221,100 C 0
33-028.2444-0101 .150,800 CC 0
7,622,700 71,021
B-6
R1100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - Please review all assumptions. CSM94A
03116194 . City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project PHASE 1- $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 2
Development Ta
Market
Values PROJECT VALUE INFORM
Square Tax
Feet Capacity ATION
Taxes .
!S .Ft.
Construct
Payable
Retail Phase I A 2,849,600 45,000 131,082 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase I B 2,659,600 42,000 122,343 4.00 1994 _19%
Retail Phase I C 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996
Retail D 0 0 0 4.00 1994 .1996
Retail. C 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19%
Retail E 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996'
1
Retail F 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail G 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail H 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail 1 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail J 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail K 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail L 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail M 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail N 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19%
Retail O 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
TOTALS 7,092,300 112,000 326,248
TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW
Beginning Period Annual Project Fis. Dis. Captured Semi-Annual Admin Semi-Annual Ending Period
Base Tax Tax Tax Capacity Tax . Gross Tax Payment Net Tax
Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity 15.00% Capacity Increment 10.00% Increment Yrs. Mth. Yr.
0.002-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 0.508-01 1994
0,508-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.002-01 1995
1.002-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.508-01 1995
1.508-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 2.002-01 1996
2.002-01 1996 71,021 326,248 48,937 206,289 141,637 14,164 127,473 2.508-01 1996
2.5 08-01 1996 71,021 326,248 48,937 206,289 141,637 14,164 127,473 3.0 02-01 1997
3.0 02-01 1997 71,021 336,035 50,405 214,608 147,349 14,735 132,614 3.5 08-01 1997
3.508-01 1997 71,021 336,035 50,405 214,608 147,349 14,735 132,614 4.002-01 1998
4.002-01 1998 71,021 346,116 51,917 223,177• 153,232 15,323 137,909 4.5 08-01 1998
4.5 08-01 1998 71,021 346,116 51,917 223,177 153,232 15,323 137,909 5.0 02-01 1999
5.0 02-01 1999 71,021 356,500 53,475 232,003 159,292 15,929 143,363 5.508-01 1999
5.5 08-01 1999 71,021 356,500 53,475 232,003 .159,292 15,929 143,363 6.0 02-01 2000
6.002-01 2000 71,021 367,195 55,079 241,094 165,534 16,553 148,981 6.508-01 2000
6.508-01 2000 71,021 367,195 55,079 241,094. 165,534 16,553 148,981 7.002-01 2001
7.002-01 2001 71,021 378,210 56,732 250,457 171,963 17,196 154,767 7.5 08-01 2001
7.508-01 2001 71,021 378,210 56,732 250,457 171,963 17,196 154,767 8.002-01 2002
8.002-01 2002 71,021 389,557 58,434 260,102 178,585 17,858 160,726 8.508-01 2002
8.508-01 2002 71,021 389,557 58,434 260,102 178,585 17,858 160,726 9.002-01 2003
9.002-01 2003 71,021 401,243 60,187 270,036 185,405 18,541 166,865 9.508-01 2003
9.508-01 2003 71,021 401,243 60,187 270,036 185,405 18,541 166,865 10.002-01 2004
10.002-01 2004 71,021 413,281 61,992 280,267 192,430 19,243 173,187 10.5.08-01 2004
10.508-01 2004 71,021 413,281 61,992 280,267 192,430 19,243 173,187 11.002-01 2005
11.002-01 2005 71,021 425,679 63,852 290,806 199,666 19,967 179,699 11.508-01 2005
11.508-01 2005 71,021 425,679 63,852 290,806 199,666 19,967 179,699 12.0102-01 2006
12.002-01 2006 71,021 438,450 65,767 301,661 207,119 20,712 186,407 12.508-01 2006
12.508-01 2006 71,021 438,450 65,767 301,661 207,119 20,712 186,40T 13.0 02-01 2007
13.002-01 2007 71,021 451,603 67,740 312,841 214,795 21,480 193,316 13.508-01 2007
13.5 08-01 2007 71,021 451,603 67,740 312,841 214,795 21,480 193,316 14.002-01 2008
14.002-01 2008 71,021 465,151 -69,773 324,357 222,702 22,270 200,432 14.5 08-01 2008
14
508-01 2008 021
71 465,151 69,773 324,357 222,702 22,270 200,432 15.002-01 2009
.
15
002-01 2009 ,
71
021 4.79,106 71,866 336,218 230,846 23,085 207,761 15.508-01 2009
.
15
508-01 2009 ,
021
71 479,106 71,866 336,218 230,846 23,085 207,761 16.002-01 2010
.
16
002-01 2010 ,
71
021 493,479 74,022 348,436 239,234 23,923 215,311 16.508-01 2010
.
16
508-01 2010 ,
71
021 479
493 74,022 348,436 .239,234. 23,923 215,311 17.002-01 2011
.
002-01
17 2011 ,
71
021 ,
508,283 76,242 361,019 247,874 24,787 223,087 17.5.08-01 2011
.
17.508-01 2011 ,
71,021 508,283 76,242 361,019 247,874 24,787 223,087 18.002-01 2012
TOTALS 6,115,326 611,533 5,503,794
PRESENT VALUE 2,625,814 262,581 2,363,233
B-7
R1100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - Please review all assumptions.
•
•
•
CSM94A
•
PHASE II
(With Fiscal Disparities Election Change)
•
•
B-8
03/16/94
City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project Phase 11- $4.00 - 3% Inflation
SHADED AREAS MAY REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION
District: I.L.N.
Inflation Rate 3.0000%
Present Value Rate. 8.50%
Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 0.0000%
Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190
Year District Created: Nov. 1985
First Year of Increment: June 1987
Last bate of TI Payment: June 2011
PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES - PAY 1994.
APARTMENT 3.400%
COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600%
COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000%
COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600%
NONHMSTD RESID 2.300%
HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000%
HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000%
HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000%
VACANT LAND 4.600%
ID BASE TAX CAPACITY
BASE
MARKET PROPERTY
VALUE TYPE
BASE
TAX
CAPACITY
33-028-24-43.0009 0 R 0
33-028-2443-0010 1,470,000 A 0
cloverled 33-028-24-43.0015 114,000 LC N/A
cioveried 33-028-24-43.0016 500,000 R N/A
cloverlear 33-028-24-43-0017 226,000 LC N/A
cloverleaf 33-028-24.43.0018 740,200 CC N/A
33-028-24-44-0025 146,900 VL 0
33-028-2444-0026 94,700 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 0
33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0028 87,500 R 0
33-028-2444-0073 147,300 CC 5,176
33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 5,009
33-028-24-44.0075 107,100 CC 3,327
33-028-2444-0076 119,700 CC 3,906
33-028-24-44-0077 91,200 C 4,195
33-028-24-44-0078 78,100 CC 2,343
33-028-24-44.0080 283,500 CC -11,441
33-028-24-44-0081 78,700 C 3,620
33-028-24-44-0082 91,200 C 4,195
33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 4,302
33-028-24-44-0084 135,100 C 6,215
33-028-24-44-0085 87,200 CC 2,616
33-028-24-44-0086 75,100 C 3,455
33-028-2444-0087 230,600 CC 9,008
33-028-24440088 128,400 CC 4,306
33-028-24-44-0089 393,100 CC 16,483
33-028-24-44-0090 216,600 CC 8,364
33-028-2444-0091 110,600 CC 3,488
33-028-2444-0092 53,800 C 2,475
33-028-24-44-0093 53,800 C 2,475
33-028-24-44-0094 100,300 CC 3,014
33-028-2444-0095 55,400 CC 1,662
33-028-24-44.0095 64,000 R 640
33-028-2444-0096 232,000 C 10,672
33-028-24-44-0097 148,100 CC 5,213
33-028-24-44-0099 295,100 CC 11,975
33-028-24-44-0100 221,100 C 10,171
33-028-2444-0101 150,800 CC 5,337
7,622,700 155,079
B-9 .
Page 1
•
0-
RIIOD-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - Please review all assumptions. CSM94C
03/16/94 City of Richfield -C.S.M. Project Phase II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 2
Development Type
Market
Values PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION
Square Tax Taxes
Feet Capacity /Sq. Ft.
Construct
Payable
Retail Phase I A 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase I B 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase I C 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase II
D
2,216,400
35,000
101,952
4.00
1994 1996
Retail Phase II C 1,583,100 . 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996;
Retail Phase II E 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase II F 1,293,400 20.425 59,497 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase II G 854,900 13,500 39,324 4.00 1994 1996
Retail H 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail 1 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail J 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19%1
Retail K 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail L 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 i
Retail M 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961.
Retail N 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 l
Retail O 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996i
TOTALS 7,530,900 118,925 346,420 71
TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW
Beginning Period Annual Project Fis. Dis. Captured Semi-Annual Admin Semi-Annual Ending Period
Base Tax Tax Tax Capacity Tax Gross Tax Payment Net Tax
Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity 0.00% Capacity ' Increment 10.00% Increment Yrs. Mth. Yr.
0.002-01 1994 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 0.508-01 1994
0.508-01 1994 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 1.002-01 1995
1.002-01 1995 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 1.508-01 1995
1.508-01 1995 155,079 155,079 0 0 . 0 0 0 2.002-01 1996
2.002-01 1996 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 2.508-01 19%
.508-01 19% 155,079. 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 3.002-01 1997
.0 02-01 1997 155,079 346,420 0 191,340 131,373 13,137 118,236 3.5-08-01 1997
.5 08-01 1997 155,079 346,420 0 191,340 131,373 13,137 118,236 4.0 02-01 1998
4.002-01 1998 155,079 356,812 0 201,733 . 138,509 13,851 124,658 4.508-01 1998
4.5 08-01 1998 155,079 356,812 0 201,733 138,509 13,851 124,658 5.002-01 1999
5.0 02-01 1999 155,079 367,517 0 212,437 145,858 14,586 131,272 5.5 08-01 1999
5.508-01 1999 155,079 367,517 0 212,437 145,858 14,566 131,272 6.002-01 2000
6.002-01 2000 155,079 378,542 0 223,463 153,428 15,343 138,086 6.508-01 2000
6.508-01 2000 155,079 378,542 0 223,463 153,428 . 15,343 138,086 7.002-01 2001
7.002-01 2001 155,079 389,898 0 234,819 161,226 16,123 145,103 -7.608-01 2001
7.5 08-01' 2001 155,079 389,898 0 234,819 161,226 16,123 145,103 8.002-01 2002
8.002-01 2002 155,079 401,595 0 246,516 169,257 16,926 152,331 8.508-01 2002
8.508-01 2002 155,079 401,595 0 246,516 169,257 16,926 152,331 9.002-01 2003
9.002-01 2003 155,079 413,643 0 258,564 177,529 17,753 159,776 9.508-01 2003
9.508-01 2003 155,079 413,643 0 258,564 177,529 17,753. 159,776 10.002-01 2004
10.002-01 2004 155,079 426,052 0 270,973 186,049 18,605 167,444 10.508-01 2004
10.508-01 2004 155,079 426,052 0 270,973 186,049 18,605 167,444 11.002-01 2005
11.0 02-01 2005 155,079 438,834 0 283,755 194,825 19,482 175,342 11.508-01 2005
11.508-01 2005 155,079 438,834 0 283,755 194,825 19,482 175,342 12.002-01 2006
12.002-01 2006 155,079 451,999 0 296,920 203,864 20,386 183,477 12.5-08-01 2006
12.508-01 2006 155,079 451,999 0 296,920 203,864 20,386 183,477. 13.002-01 2007
13.002-01 2007 155,079 465,559 0 310,480 213,174 21,317 191,856 13.508-01 2007
13.508-01 2007 155,079 465,559 0 310,480 213,174 21,317 191,856 14.002-01 2008
14.002-01 2008 155,079 479,526 0 324,446 222,763 22,276 200,487 14.508-01 2008
14.508-01 2008 155,079 479,526 0 324,446 222,763 22,276 200,487 15.002-01 2009
15.002-01 2009 155,079 493,912 0 338,832 232,640 23,264 209,376 15.508-01 2009
15.508-01 2009 155,079 493,912 0 338,832 232,640 23,264 209,376 16.002-01 2010
16.002-01 2010 155,079 508,729 0 353,650 242,814 24,281 218,533 16.508-01 2010
16.508-01 2010 155,079 508,729 0 353,650 242,814 24,281 218,533 17.002-01 2011
17.002-01 2011 155,079 523;991 0 368,911 253,293 25,329 227,963 17.508-01 2011
17.508-01 2011 155,079 523,991 0 368,911 253,293 25,329 227,963 18.002-01 2012
TOTALS 5,653,201 565,320 5,087,881
PRESENT VALUE 2,292,606 229,261 2,063,345
R1100-18
B-l0
Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - Please review all assumptions.
CSM94C
•
PHASE II
(Without Fiscal Disparities Election Change)
•
•
B- I I
03/16/94 City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project Phase II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 1
•
E
•
SHADED AREAS MAY REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION
District: I.L.N.
Inflation Rate 3.0000%
Present Value Rate 8.50%
Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 15.0000%
Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190
Year District Created:
First.Year of Increment:
Nov. 1985
June 1987
June 2011
PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES - PAY 1994.
APARTMENT 3.400%
COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600%
COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000%
COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600%
NONHMSTD RESID 2.300%
HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000%
HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000%
HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000% .
VACANT LAND 4.600%
ID BASE TAX CAPACITY
BASE
MARKET PROPERTY
VALUE TYPE
BASE
TAX
CAPACITY
33-028-24-43-0009 0 R 0
33-028-24-43-0010 1,470,000 A 0
cloverleaf 33-028-24-43.0015 114,000 LC N/A
cloverleaf 33-028-24-43.0016 500,000 R N/A
Ctoveriear 33-028-2443.0017 226,000 LC N/A
cloverleaf 33-028-24-43-0018 740,200 CC N/A
33-028-2444-0025 146,900 VL 0
33-028-2444-0026 94,700 CC 0
33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 0
33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 0
33-028.24-44-0028 87,500 R 0
33-028-24-44-0073 147,300 CC 5,176
33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 5,009
33-028-24-44-0075 107,100 CC 3,327
33-028-24-44-0076 119,700 CC 3,906
33-028-2444-0077 91,200 C 4,195
33-028-24-44-0078 78,100 CC 2,343
33-028-2444-0080 283,500 CC 11,441
33-028-2444-0081 78,700 C 3,620
33-028-24-4-0082 91,200. C 4,195
33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 4,302
33-028-24-44-0084 135.100 C 6,215
33-028-2444-0085 87,200 CC 2,616
33-028-2444-0086 75,100 C 3,455
33-028-2444-0087 230,600 CC 9,008
33-028-24-440088 128,400 CC 4,306-
33-028-24-44-0089 393,100 CC 16,483
33-028-2444-0090 216,600 CC 8,364
33-028-2444-0091 110,600 CC 3,488
33-028-2444-0092 53,800 C 2,475
33-028-2444-0093 53,800 C 2,475
33-028-2444-0094 100,300 CC 3,014
33-028-2444-0095 55,400 CC 1,662
33-028-2444-0095 64,000 R 640
33-028-24-44-0096 232,000 C 10,672
33-028-2444-0097 148,100 CC 5,213
33-028-2444-0099 295,100 CC 11,975
33-028-24-44-0100 221,100 C 10,171
33-028-24-44-0101 15000 CC 5,337
7 .622,700 155,079
B-12
R1100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - Please review all assumptions. CSM94C
03116/94 City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project.Phase II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 2
PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION
Market Square Tax Taxes
Development Type Values Feet Capacity /S .Ft. Construct Payable
Retail Phase I A 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase 1 B 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase I C 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19%
Retail Phase II D 2,216,400 35,000 101,952 4.00 1994 19%
Phase 11
Retail C 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996
.
Retail Phase II E 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase 11 F 1,293,400 20,425 59,497 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase II G 854,900 13,500 39,324 4.00 1994 1996
Retail H 0 0. 0 4.00 1994 •1996
Retail 1 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail J 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996;
Retail K . 0 0 0 4.00 1994
1994 1996
1996 l
Retail L 0 0 0 4.00
Retail M 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail N 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail 0 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
TOTALS 7,530,900 118,925 346,420
•
Beginning Period Annual Project Fis. Dis. Captured Semi-Annual Admin Semi-Annual Ending Period
Y Base Tax
i
C Tax
Ca aci Tax Capacity
00%
15 Tax
Capacity Gross Tax
Increment Payment
10.00% Net Tax
Increment
Yrs. Mth.
Yr.
Yrs. Mth.
0
002-,01 r.
1994 a ac
079
155 155,079 .
0 0 0 0 0 0.5 08-01 1994
.
0.5 08-01 1994 ,
155,079 155,079 0 .0 0 0
0 0
0 1.002-01
1
508-01 1995
1995
1.002-01 1995 155,079 155,079 0 0
0 0
0 0 0 .
2.002-01 1996
1.508-01 1995 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 2.508-01 1996
2.002-01 1996 155,079 155,079 0
0 0 0 0 0 3.002-01 1997
2.508-01
3
002-01 1996
1997 155,079
079
155 155,079
420
346 51,963 139,377 95,696 9,570 86,126 3.5 08-01 1997
.
3.5 08-01 1997 ,
155,079 ,
346,420 51,963 139,377 95,696 9,570
176
10 86,126
585
91 4.002-01
5 08-01
4 1998
1998
4.002-01
508-01
4 1998
1998 155,079
079
155 356,812
812
356 53,522
53,522 148,211
148,211 101,761
101,761 ,
10,176 ,
91,585 .
5.002-01 1999
.
5.002-01 1999 ,
155,079 ,
367,517 55,127 157,310 108,008 10,801 97,207 5.508-01
0 02-01
6 1999
2000
5.5 08-01 1999 155,079
079
155 367,517
542
378 55,127
781
56 157,310
681
166 108,008
443
114 10,801
11,444 97,207
102,998 .
6.508-01 2000
6.002-01
508-01
6 2000
2000 ,
079
155 ,
.
378,542 ,
56,781 ,
166,681 ,
114,443 11,444 102,998 7.002-01 2001
.
7.002-01 2001 ,
155,079 389,898 58,485 176,334
334
1
6 121,070
070
121 12,107
107
12 108,963
963
108 7.508-01
8.002-01 2001
2002
7.508-01
002-01
8 2001
2002 155,079
079
155 389,898
401,595 58,485
60,239 7
,
186,277 ,
127,897 ,
12,790 ,
115,107 8.508-01 2002
.
8.508-01 2002 ,
155,079 401,595 60,239 186,277 127,897 12,790 115,107 9.002-01
508-01
9 2003
2003
9.002-01 2003 155,079 413,643
643
13 62,046
046
62 196,517
517
196 134,928
928
134 13,493
493
13 121,435
121,435 .
10.0 02-01 2004
9.508-01
002-01
10 2003
2004 155,079
079
155 4
,
426,052 ,
63,908 ,
207,065 ,
142,170 ,
14,217 127,953 10.508-01 2004
.
10.5 08-01 2004 ,
155,079 426,052 63,908 207,065
930
217 142,170
629
149 14,217
963
14 127,953
134
666 11.002-01
11.508-01 2005
2005
11.002-01
508-01
11 2005
2005 155,079
079
155 438,834
834
438 65,825
65,825 ,
217,930 ,
149,629 ,
14,963 ,
134,666 12.002-01 2006
.
12.002-01 2006 ,
155,079 ,
451,999 67,800 229,120
120
29 157,313
313
157 15,731
731
15 141,581
581
141 12.508-01
13.002-01 2006
2007
12.508-01
002-01
13 2006
2007 155,079
079
155 451,999
559
465 67,800
69,834 ,
2
240,646 ,
165,226 ,
16,523 ,
148,704 13.508-01 2007
.
13.508-01 2007 ,
155,079 ,
465,559 69,834 240,646 165,226 16,523 148,704 14.0 02-01
508-01
14 2008
2008
14.002-01 2008 155,079 479,526
479
526 71,929
929
71 252,518
518
252 173,377
377
173 17,338
338
17 156,040
156,040 .
15.002-01 2009
14.508-01
002-01
15 2008
2009 155,079
079
155 •
,
912
493 ,
74,087 ,
264,745 ,
181,773 ,
18,177 163,596 15.508-01 2009
.
15.508-01 2009 ,
155,079 ,
493,912 74,087 264,745 181,773 18,177 163,596 .16.002-01
508-01
16 2010
2010
16.002-01 2010 155,079 508,729
729
08 76,309
309
76 277,340
340
277 190,420
190
420 19,042
19,042 171,378
171,378 .
17.002-01 2011
16.508-01
0 02-01
17 2010
2011 155,079
079
- 155 ,
5
991
523 ,
78,599 ,
290,313 ,
'199,327. 19,933 179,395 17.508-01 2011
.
17.508-01 2011 ,
155,079 ,
523,991 78,599 290,313 199,327 19,933 _ 179,395 18.002-01 2012
B-13
•
RI100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - Please review all assumptions. CSM94C
PHASE I & PHASE II
(With Fiscal Disparities Election Change)
B-14
03116/94 City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project Phase 1 And 11- $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 1
BASIC ASSUMPTIONS
SHADED AREAS MAY REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION
District: I.L.N.
Inflation Rate 3.0000%
Present Value Rate 8.50%
Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 0.0000%
Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190
Year District Created: Nov. 1985
First Year of Increment: June 1987
Last Date of TI Payment: June 2011
PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES - PAY 1994
APARTMENT 3.400%
COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600%
COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000%
COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600%
NONHMSTD RESID 2.300%
HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000%
HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000%
HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000%
VACANT LAND 4.600%
ID BASE TAX CAPACITY
BASE
MARKET PROPERTY
VALUE TYPE
BASE
TAX
CAPACITY
33-028-24-43-0009 0 R 0
33-028-24-43-001.0 1,470,000 A 49,980
Cloverleaf 33-028-24.43-0015 114,000 LC NIA
cloverleaf 33-028-24-43-0016 500,000 R NIA
Cloverleaf 33-028-24.43-0017 226,000 LC N/A
Cloverleaf 33-028-24-43-0018 740,200 CC N/A
33-028-2444-0025 146,900 VL 6,757
33-028-2444-0026 94,700 CC 2,841
33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 7,659
33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 2,754
33-028-24-44-0028 87,500 R 1,030
33-028-2444-0073 147,300 CC 5,176
33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 5,009
33-028-24-44-0075 107,100 CC 3,327
33-028-2444-0076 119,700 CC 3,906
33-028-24440077 91,200 C 4,195
33-028-2444-0078 78,100 CC 2,343
33-028-24-44-0080 283,500 CC 11,441
33-028-2444-0081 78,700 C 3,620
33-028-24440082 91,200 C 4,195
33-028.2444-0083 128,300 CC 4,302
33-028-24-44-0064 135,100 C 6,215
33-028-24-44-0085 87,200 CC 2,616
33-028-2444-0086 75,100 C 3,455
33-028-2444-0087 230,600 CC 9,008
33-028-24440088 128,400 CC 4,306
33-028-2444-0089 393,100 CC .16,483
33-028-2444-0090 216,600 CC 8,364
33-028.2444-0091 110,600 CC 3,488 .
33-026-2444-0092 53,800 C 2,475
33-028-2444-0093 53,800 C 2,475
33-028-24-44-0094 100,300 CC 3,014
33-028-2444-0095 55,400 CC 1,662
33-028-24-44-0095 64,000 R 640
33-028-2444-0096 232,000 C 10,672
33-028-24-44-0097 148,100 CC 5,213-
33-028-24-44-0099 295,100 CC 11,975
33-028.24-44-0100 221,100 C 10,171
33-028-2444-0101 150,800 CC 5,337
7,622,700 226,101
B-15
•
•
E
Ri100-18 Prepared by Pubiicorp Inc. - Please review all assumptions. CSM94F
03116/94 City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project Phase I And 11- $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 2
Develo ment Type
Market
Values PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION
Square Tax Taxes
Feet Capacity /S .Ft.
Construct
Payable
Retail Phase I A 2,849,600 45,000 131,082 4.00 1994 19%
Retail Phase 1. B 2,659,600 42,000 122,343 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase I C 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase II D 2,216,400 35,000 101,952 4.00 1994 19%
Retail Phase It C 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase II E 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996
Retail Phase II F 1,293,400 20,425 59,497 4.00 1994 19961
Retail Phase II G 854,900 13,500 39,324 4.00 1994 1996
Retail H 0 0 ' 0 4.00 1994 19%
Retail 1 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail J 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail K 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail L 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19961
Retail M 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19% j
Retail N 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996
Retail O 0 0 0 4.00 1994 19%
TOTALS 14,623,200 230,925 672,667 I
TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW
Beginning Period Annual Project Fis. Dis. Captured Semi-Annual Admin Semi-Annual Ending Period
Base Tax Tax Tax Capacity Tax Gross Tax Payment Net Tax
Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity 0.00% Capacity Increment 10.00% Increment Yrs. Mth. Yr.
0.002-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 0.508-01 1994
0.508-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.002-01 1995
1.002-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 08-01 1995
1.508-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 2.002-01 1996
2.002-01 19% 71,021 326,248 0 255,226 175,237 17,524 157,713 2.5 08-01 1996
.5 08-01 1996 71,021 326,248 0 255,226 175,237 17,524 157,713 3.0 02-01 1997
.002-01 1997 226,101 672,667 0 446,566 306,610 30,661 275,949 3.508-01 1997
3.508-01 1997 226,101 672,667 0 446,566 306,610 30,661 275,949 4.002-01 1998
4.002-01 1998 226,101 692,847 0 466.747 320.466 32,047 288,419 4.5 08-01 1998
4.508-01 1998 226,101 692,847 0 466,747 320,466 32,047 288,419 5.002-01 1999
5.002-01 1999 226,101 713,633 0 487,532 334,737 33,474 301,263 5.5 08-01 1999
5.508-01 1999 226,101 713,633 0 487,532 334,737 33,474 301,263 6.002-01 2000
6.002-01 2000 226,101 735,042 0 508,941 349,436 34,944 314,493 6.508-01 2000
6.508-01 2000 226,101 735,042 0 508,941 349,436 34,944 314,493 7.002-01 2001
7.002-01 2001 226,101 757,093 0 530,992 364,577 36,458 328,119 7.508-01 2001
7.508-01 2001 226,101 757,093 0 530,992 364,577 36,458 328,119 8.002-01 2002
8.002-01 2002 226,101 779,806 0 553,705 380,171 38,017 342,154 8.5 08-01 2002
8.508-01 2002 226,101 779,806 0 553,705 380,171 38,017 342,154 9.002-01 2003
9.002-01 2003 226,101 803,200 0 577,099 396,233 39,623 356,610 9.508-01 2003
9.508-01 2003 226,101 803,200 0 577,099 396,233 39,623 356,610 10.002-01 2004
10.002-01 2004 226,101 827,296 0 601,195 412,778 41,278 371,500 10.508-01 2004
10.508-01 2004 226,101 827,296 0 601,195 412,778 41,278 371,500 11.002-01 2005
11.002-01 2005 226,101 852,115 0 626,014 429,818 42,982 386,836 11.508-01 2005
11.508-01 2005 226,101 852,115 0 626,014 429,818 42,982 386,836 12.002-01 2006
12.002-01 2006 226,101 877,678 0 651,577 447,370 44,737 402,633 12.508-01 2006
12.508-01 2006 226,101 877,678 0 651,577 447,370 44,737 402.633 13.002-01 2007
13.002-01 2007 226,101 904,009 0 677,908 465,448 46,545 418,903 13.5 08-01 2007
13.508-01 2007 226,101 904,009 0 677,908 465,448 46,545 418,903 14.002-01 2008
14.002-01 2008 226,101 931,129 0 705,028 484,069 48,407 435,662 14.508-01 2008
14.508-01 2008 226,101 931,129 0 705,028 484,069 48,407 435,662 15.002-01 2009
15.002-01 2009 226,101 959,063 0 732,962 503,248 50,325 452,923 15.5 08-01 2009
15.508-01 2009 226,101 959,063 0 732,962 503,248 50,325 452,923 16.002-01 2010
16.002-01 2010 226,101 987,835 0 761,734 523,003 52,300 470,702. 16.508-01 2010
16.5 08-01 2010 226,101 987,835 0 761,734 523,003 52,300 470,702 17.0-02-01 2011
17.002-01 2011 226,101 1,017,470 0 791,369 543,350 54,335 489,015 17.508-01 2011
17.508-01 2011 226,101 1,017,470 0 791,369 543,350 54,335 489,015. 18.0 02-01 2012
TOTALS 12,873,101 1,287,310 11,585,790
PRESENT VALUE 5,403,876 540,388 4,863,488
B-16
R1100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - Please review all assumptions. CSM94F
•
PHASE I & PHASE II
(Without Fiscal Disparities Election Change)
•
•
B-17
03116/94 City of Richfield - C.S.M. Project Phase I And II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 1
0
•
•
SHADED AREAS MAY REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION
District: I.L.N.
Inflation Rate 3.0000%
Present Value Rate 8.50%
Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 15.0000%
Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190
Year District Created:
First Year of Increment:
Last Date of TI Paymen
Nov. 1985
June 1987
PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES - PAY 1994
APARTMENT 3.400%
COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600%
COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000%
COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600%
NONHMSTD RESID 2.300%
HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000%
HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000%
HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000%
VACANT LAND 4.600%
ID BASE TAX CAPACITY
BASE
MARKET PROPERTY
VALUE TYPE
BASE
TAX
CAPACITY
33-028-24-43.0009 0 R 0
33-028-24-43.0010 1,470,000 A 49,980
Cloverles! 33-028-24-43-0015 114,000 LC NIA
G1eerlea[ 33-028-24-43-0016 500,000 R NIA
Clo.er?e.r 33-028-24-43-0017 226,000 LC N/A
clo.eriesf 33-028-24-43.0018 740,200 CC N/A
33-028-24-44-0025 146,900 VL 6,757
33-028-24-44-0026 94,700 CC 2,841
33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 7,659
33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 2,754
33-028-24-44-0028 87,500 R 1,030
33-028-24-44-0073 147,300 CC 5,176
33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 5,009
33-028-24-440075 107,100 CC 3,327
33-028-24-44-0076 119,700 CC 3,906
33-028-24-44-0077 91,200 C 4,195
33-028-24-440078 78,100 CC 2,343
33-028-24-440080 283,500 CC 11,441
33-028-24-44-0061 78,700 C 3,620
33-028-24-44-0082 91,200 C 4,195
33-028-24440083 128,300 CC 4,302
33-028-24-440084 135,100 C 6,215
33-028-24-44-0085 87,200 CC 2,616
33-028.24-44-0086 75,100 C 3,455
33-028-24-44-0087 230,600 CC 9,008.
33-028-24-44-0088 128,400 CC 4,306
33-028.2444-0089 393,100 CC .16,483
33-028-24-44.0090 216,600 CC 8,364
33-028-24-44-0091 110,600 CC 3,488
33-028-24-44-0092 53,800 C 2,475
33-028-24-44-0093 53,800 C 2,475
33-028-2444-0094 100,300 CC 3,014
33-028-24-44-0095 55,400 CC 1,662
33-028-24-44-0095 64,000 R 640
33-028-2444-0096 232,000 C 10,672.
33-028-24-44-0097 148,100 CC 5,213
33-028-24-44-0099 295,100 CC 11,975
33-028-24-44-0100 221,100 C 10,171
33-028-24-44-0101 150,800 CC 5,337
7,622,700 226,101
B-18
R1100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. = Please review all assumptions. CSM94F
03116/94 Chy 01 Richfield • C.S.M. Project Phese I And It • $1.00 - 3% InBalieon
'pmont TYPO, Pheso I
Pliese I H
Phase I C
Phase 11 D
Phase 11 C
Phase 11 E
Phase II F
Phaso II G
H
1
J
K
L
M
N
_ Q
-- - ROJ€U VALUEINF I N
Market square Tex Taxes
Values Feet
- Ca scl r /Sq;Ft. Construct. Pays
-
46.000 :..:4.Q0 1994
2,859,800 42,000 122,343 .4:40 1994
1,583,100 25,000 72,823 ::4,00 1994
2,216,400 35,000 101,952 . ' ; : 4x10 1994
1,683,100 25,000 72,623 : :;.i X00 1994
1,583100 26,000 72,823... .: 4.00 1994
1,293,400 20,425 69.497. : • ::::::4:00 1994
854,900 13,500 39,324 1994
0 0 0 1994
0 0 0 1994
0 0
0 0 0 1994
0 0 0 1994
0 0 0 . :.: 1994
0 0 0 : • ; : ; 4,00 1994
0, 0 ,
0 •
1994
14,623.206 ? 1372,887
1996
1996
1996
1998
1996
1996
1996
1996
1096
1998
1996
1996
1996
1996
Page 2
•
Beginning Period Annual Project Fim. Dim. Captured eaml-Annual Admin Sem6Annual Ending POW
Bass Tax Tax Tax Capacity Tax Gross Tax Payment Net Tex
Yrs. Mth. Yr.
1 7
? n 0 Ca aci Cepaci 15,0091; Ca
..
0 Increment
- 10.00% Increment
- Yrs. Mth. Yr.
• 1, 1 71,021 b 0
0.5 08-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 02-01 1995
1.002-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.608-01 1995
1.508-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 2.002-01 1998
2.0 02-01 1998 71,021 326,248 48,937 208,289 141,831 14,164 127,473 2.606-01 1996
2.5 08-01 1996 71,021 326,248 48,937 206,289 141,637 14,164 127,473 3.002-01 1997
3.002-01 1997 228,101 672,667 1,00,900 345,666 237,333 23,733 113,800 3.5 08-01 1997
3.5 08.01 1997 226,101 672,667 100,900 345,666 237,333 23,733 213,600 4.002-01 1996
4.002-01 1998 226,101 892,847 103,927 382,819 249,110 24,911 224,199 4.508-01 1998
4.6 08-01 1998 226,101 892447 103,927 382,819 249,110 24,011 224,199 6.002-01 1999
5.0 02.01 1999 226,101 713,633 107,045 360,487 261,240 26,124 235,116 6.6 08-01 1999
5.6 08-01 1999 226,101 713,633 107,045 380,487 281,240 26,124 235,116 6,002-01 2000
8.002-01 2000 226,101 735,042 110,258 398,685 273,735 27,373 246,361 8.5 08-01 2000
8.5 OB,01 2000 228,101 735,042 110,256 398,685 273,735 27,373 248,361 7.0 02-01 2001
7.002-01 2001 226,101 767,093 113,884 417,428 266,604 2800 257,944 7.5 08-01 2001
7.50841 2001 226,101 757,093 113,564 417,428 288,804 28,660 257,944 8,002-01 2002
8.002-01 2002 226,101 779,806 110,971 438,734 299,859 291988 269,873 8.5 08-01 2002
8.606-01 2002 226,101 779,806 116,971 436,734 299,859 29,986 289,873 9.002-01 2003
9.002-01 2003 226101 803,200 120,480 . 458,619 313,612 $1,351 282,161 9.5 011-01 2003
9.5 08-01 2003 228,101 803,200 120,480 488,819 313,612 31,581 282181 10.002-01 2004
10.0 02-01 2004 226,101 827,296 124,094 .477.101 327,575 32,757 294,817 10.5 08-01 2004
10.5 OB-01 2004 226,101 827,290 124,094 477,101 327,675 32,787 284,817 11.0 0"1 2005
11,002-01
2005
228,101
852,115
127,817
498,197
342,059
34,208
307,853
11.508-01 .
2005
11-508-01 2005 226,101 862,115 127,617 498,197 342,059 34,206 307,853 12.002-01 2006
12-002-01 2006 226,101 877,878 131,852 519,928 356,978 56,898 321,281 12.508-01 1006
12.5 08.01 2008 226,101 877,678 13102 519,926 356,978 35,608 321,281 13:0 02-01 2007
13.0 02-01 2007 226,101 904,009 135,601 642,307 872,345 $7,234 110
335 13.5 08-01 2007
13-608-01 2007 226,101 904,009 135,601 542,307 372,345 37,234 ,
336,110 14.0 02-01 2008
14.0 02-01 2008 226,101 931,129 139,669 685,359 388,172 38,817 349,355 14.608-01 2008
14.5 OB-01 2008 228,101 931,129 139,669 685,359 58 AU 38,817 349,355 16.002-01 2009
15.002-01 2009 228,101 959,063 143,859 889,103 404,475 40,44T 384,027 16.5 OB-01 2009
16.$ 08-01 2009 226,101 959,083 .143.859 689,103 404,475 40,447 364,027 16.002-01 2010
16.0 02.01 2010 226,101 987,835 146,175 613,559 421,268 42,127 379,140 18.5 08-01 2010
16.5 08-01 2010 226,101 987,835 146,175 813,659 421,286. 42,127 379
140 0 02-01
1T 2011
17-002-01 •2011 226,101 1,017,470 152,620 638,748 "438,581 43,858 ,
394
705 .
17
5 08-01 2011
17.6 08.01 2011 26,101 1017,470
TOTALS 152,620 838.74QQ. 438 661
? 926 ,
43,916 394 706
1022 893 0
5 .
18.0 02-01 2012
- --FXES9-N1 VALL - 3
4.07asi 4Z7,725 3,849 666
RIM-18
B-19
Prepared by Publicorp Inc, • Phase fwlew 81 assumpWns.
•
CSM94F
•
APPENDIX C
IMPACTS ON TAXING JURISDICTIONS
•
•
C-1
With Fiscal Disparities Election Change
•
•
C-2
IMPACT ON TAXING JURISDICTIONS - With Fiscal Disparities Election Change
The purpose of analyzing impacts on taxing jurisdictions is to (a.) determine how tax increment
assistance provided to a proposed development project impacts taxing jurisdictions; (b.) determine
the level of impact as it relates to tax base; and (c.) determine the amount of taxes a taxing entity
would need to levy in order to increase their respective tax base by the amount the project brings
in absent the project.
If the "But For" test were not met, construction would not occur. That is, without the creation
and existence of the tax increment district, construction would not occur because the cost of
developing the proposed project by a private developer would be prohibitive. Acceptable rates of
return on project investment could not be met and risk would be too high. Development would
not move forward. Construction would not occur without the assistance of the city. In light of
this, the impact to taxing jurisdictions would be $0. Foregone would be the benefits of a new
construction project, increase overall tax base, and other project objectives. The estimated impact
of the ILN Tax Increment District would be as follows if the project were built without tax
increment financing:
IMPACT ON TAX BASE
•
The following table displays captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax
rates and tax capacities are the payable 1994 figures for all jurisdictions. The potential taxes
column is the estimate of the amount of taxes each jurisdiction would theoretically have to raise if
the goal of taxing entities was to raise tax base equal to that of the project without constructing
the project.
IMPACT ON TAX RATES
•
C-3
In addition, the impact on the school district does not include the effect of state aid for education
upon school district funding.
•
Without Fiscal Disparities Election Change
•
•
C-4
IMPACT ON TAXING JURISDICTIONS- Without Fiscal Disparities Election Change
The purpose of analyzing impacts on taxing jurisdictions is to (a.) determine how tax increment
assistance provided. to a proposed development project impacts taxing jurisdictions; (b.) determine
the level of impact as it relates to tax base; and (c.) determine the amount of taxes a taxing entity
would need to levy in order to increase their respective tax base by the amount the project brings
in absent the project.
If the "But For" test were not met, construction would not occur. That is, without the creation
and existence of the tax increment district, construction would not occur because the cost of
developing the proposed project by a private developer would be prohibitive. Acceptable rates of
return on project investment could not be met and risk would be too high. Development would
not move forward. Construction would not occur without the assistance of the city. In light of
this, the impact to taxing jurisdictions would be $0. Foregone would be the benefits of a new
construction project, increase overall tax base, and other project objectives. The estimated impact
of the ILN Tax Increment District would be as follows if the project were built without tax
increment financing:
IMPACT ON TAX BASE
•
The following table displays captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax
rates and tax capacities are the payable 1994 figures for all jurisdictions. The potential taxes
column is the estimate of the amount of taxes each jurisdiction would theoretically have to raise if
the goal of taxing entities was to raise tax base equal to that of the project without constructing
the project.
IMPACT ON TAX RATES
Current Captured Potential
Taxing Enti Tax Rate Tax Ca aci Taxes .
Hennepin Count 37.441 345,666 129,421
City of Richfield 26.164 345,666 90,440
School District 280 66.190 345,666 228,796
Other 7.524 345,666 26,008
Total 137.319 345,666 474,665
In addition, the impact on the school district does not include the effect of state aid for education
upon school district funding.
C-5
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.90
HRA Letter No. 24
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue-Statement:
Conceptual acceptance of Shops at Lyndale redevelopment proposal;
ILN.
Background:
At recent HRA meetings to which the City Council was invited,
representatives of CSM Corporation presented their proposal for
redeveloping that portion of the ILN south of 77th Street and
east of Lyndale Avenue (excepting the Conoco facility). The
project envisions 131,000 square feet of retail space constructed
in two phases. Phase I construction would be initiated in July
with completion in November. Construction of Phase II would
follow in 1995.
Should the HRA and City Council respond favorably to the proposed
concept at the March 28, 1994 meeting, many people will be
impacted and many dollars will be spent in anticipation of
construction. It is therefore important to ascertain if there
is support to continue on with a lengthy, complicated and costly
process.
Recommended Motion:
To support on a conceptual basis Shops at Lyndale.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The redevelopment process is time consuming and expensive.
2. The lives of many people would be impacted including those
businesses which would be located or relocated into the new
facility or elsewhere as well as the developer.
3. People need to plan their future. Uncertainty may well lead
to frustration and anger at the process as would changing
course after a significant period to time.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Reject the development concept.
2. Delay action.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action on this item at the March 28, 1994 meeting will facilitate
the planning by all those impacted..
•
Respectfully submitted,
James . Prosser
City pager/Executive
Director
JDP : cak
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
APPROVING MODIFICATION TO RICHFIELD
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN, CONSISTING OF
MODIFICATION NO. 4 TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE
INTERSTATE/LYNDALE/NICOLLET REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT; REQUESTING THE RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL
TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING THEREON:
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PLANS
BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in
and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01 The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City
of Richfield, Minnesota (the "HRA") adopted a redevelopment
plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") and a tax increment
financing plan (the "TIF Plan") for the area of the City
generally known as the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet area
(the "Project Area") on October 21, 1985.
1.02 The City Council of the City of Richfield (the "City") held
a public hearing on the Redevelopment plan and TIF Plan
(collectively, the "Plans") and approved the plans on
November 12, 1985.
1.03 Corrections to property identification numbers and boundary
lines and changes in the public and private improvements
proposed to be constructed within the Project Area occurred
thereafter and necessitated adopting Modification No. 1 to
the Plans in 1985 and Modification No. 2 to the Plans in
1989.
1.04 On May 17, 1993 the HRA adopted a Redevelopment Plan for
the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, which consisted,
in part, of the Project Area and which Redevelopment Plan
contained Modification No. 3 to the Plans.
1.05 Additional acquisitions and changes in the public and
private improvements proposed to be constructed within the
Project Area have occurred thereafter and have necessitated
the consideration of this Modification No. 4 to the Plans.
1.06 The HRA has caused to be prepared modified Plans which are
contained in a document entitled "Interstate Lyndale
Nicollet Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan,
Modification No. 4" dated March 21, 1994, and on file with
the HRA.
Section 2. HRA Approval.
2.01 The HRA finds that the objectives of the HRA in encouraging
development and redevelopment within the Project Area will be
advanced by adoption of Modification No. 4 to the Plans.
2.02 The Modification No. 4 to the Plans is herby approved and
adopted by the HRA, subject to review and approval by the
Richfield Planning Commission.
Section 3. Further Proceeding.
3.01 The executive director of the HRA is hereby authorized and
directed to transmit copies of the Modification No. 4 of the
Plans.to-the school board of Independent School District No.
280 and the Board of Commissioners of Hennepin County for
review and comment and to notify said public bodies of the
public hearing to be held on Modification No. 4 to the Plans
by the City.
3.02 The HRA requests that the Richfield Planning Commission
review Modification No. 4 and comment regarding the
consistency of the modified Plans wit the City's
Comprehensive Plan and comment with regards to Minnesota
Statutes, 362.356, Subd. 2.
3.03 The HRA requests the City to hold the public hearing on
Modification No. 4 to the plans required by Minnesota
Statutes, 469.028 and Minnesota Statutes, 469.175, subd. 3 as
soon hereafter as is practicable and recommends that the
modified Plans be approved by City.
Section 4. Financina.
4.01 The HRA intends to request that the City assist from time to
time in financing the public redevelopment costs identified
in the Modified Plans by issuance of its general obligation
bonds payable from the tax increment of the TIF District.
4.02 The HRA also intends to request that the City from time to
time consider various other actions necessary to the
implementation of the Modified Plans and pledges its
cooperation with the City in achieving the objectives of the
Modified Plans.
Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for
the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March,
1994.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Vern Luettinger, Secretary